Fresno City Council
October 13, 2022

City of Fresno Department of Transportation
Fresno Area Express (FAX)
2022 Title VI Program

APPENDICES

Federal Recipient Identification Number: 1649

Developed August 2022
Proposed for adoption by the Fresno City Council:

October 13, 2022

Proposed for submittal to:

Federal Transit Administration
Region IX
90 Seventh Street, Suite 15-300
San Francisco, CA 94103
December 1, 2022

Point of Contact:

Jeff Long
City of Fresno Department of Transportation
2223 G Street
Fresno, CA 93706
(559) 621-1436

Prepared with assistance from:

Moore & Associates, Inc.
25852 McBean Parkway, Suite 187
Valencia, CA 91355

The preparation of this report has been financed in part through a grant from the U.S.

Department of Transportation, the Federal Transit Administration, and in part through local funds from the Fresno Council of Governments.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Page i

Table of Contents
Table of Exhibits ....................................................................................................................... iii IV. APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... 83 APPENDIX A: TITLE VI INFORMATION INCLUDED IN THE SCHEDULE GUIDE ............ 85 APPENDIX B: FTA CIVIL RIGHTS ASSURANCE STATEMENT ......................................... 89 APPENDIX C: FAX BASE SYSTEM ...................................................................................... 93 APPENDIX D: LOW-INCOME POPULATION CONCENTRATIONS ................................... 97 WITHIN FAX SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................... 97 APPENDIX E: MINORITY POPULATION CONCENTRATIONS ........................................ 101 WITHIN FAX SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................. 101 APPENDIX F: LIMITED-ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AREAS ............................................... 105 APPENDIX G: SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP LIST ....................................................................................................... 109 APPENDIX H: 2022 FAX BUS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY ........................... 111 APPENDIX I: 2022 HANDY RIDE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY ...................... 209 APPENDIX J: 2022 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY INSTRUMENTS ................. 321 APPENDIX K: NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS ......................................................... 341 APPENDIX L: TITLE VI MAJOR SERVICE CHANGE, DISPARATE IMPACT, AND DISPROPORTIONATE BURDEN POLICY ................................................................... 343 APPENDIX M: TITLE VI COMPLAINT FORM ..................................................................... 349 APPENDIX N: FRESNO CITY COUNCIL TITLE VI PROGRAM APPROVAL ................... 355 APPENDIX O: CENSUS TRACT CHART............................................................................ 357 APPENDIX P: CENSUS TRACTS WITH FIXED-ROUTE SERVICE MAP........................ 363 APPENDIX Q: FAX SERVICE EQUITY ANALYSIS ............................................................ 367 APPENDIX R: FAX TITLE VI FARE EQUITY ANALYSIS ................................................... 413 APPENDIX S: WORKSHOP MATERIALS FOR 2022 TITLE VI PROGRAM UPDATE ..... 451 APPENDIX T: FAX LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN (LAP) TRAINING MATERIALS .... 461 APPENDIX U: STAFF AND EXTERNAL TITLE VI PROGRAM UPDATE SURVEYS ....... 477

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Page ii

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Page iii

Table of Exhibits

Exhibit A.1 Title VI Information in Schedule Guide (English) ........................................ 87 Exhibit A.2 Title VI Information in Schedule Guide (Spanish) ....................................... 88 Exhibit B.1 FY 2022 FTA Certifications and Assurances Signature Page .................... 91 Exhibit C.1 FAX Fixed-Route System Map ................................................................... 95 Exhibit D.1 Demographic Map: Low-Income Population .............................................. 99 Exhibit E.1 Demographic Map: Minority Population.................................................... 103 Exhibit F.1 Demographic Map: LEP Population ......................................................... 107 Exhibit G.1 2022 SSTAC Membership List ................................................................. 109 Exhibit J.1 FAX 2022 Survey Instrument (English) ..................................................... 322 Exhibit J.2 FAX 2022 Survey Instrument (Spanish).................................................... 326 Exhibit J.3 Handy Ride 2022 Survey Instrument ........................................................ 330 Exhibit K.1 Notice to the Public (Onboard) ................................................................. 341 Exhibit K.2 Notice to the Public (Facility) .................................................................... 342 Exhibit M.1 Bilingual Title VI Complaint Form ............................................................ 351 Exhibit N.1 Fresno City Council Title VI Plan Approval – Meeting Minutes ................ 356 Exhibit O.1 Census 2020 Population Estimates by Race/Ethnicity by Census Tract . 357 Exhibit P.1 Demographic Map: Minority Population with Fixed-Route Service Map ... 365 Exhibit S.1 Title VI Workshop Flyer ............................................................................ 452 Exhibit S.2 Title VI Virtual Workshop Notice ............................................................... 453 Exhibit S.3 Title VI Workshop Website Posting .......................................................... 454 Exhibit S.4 Title VI Workshop Wayfinding Signage .................................................... 455 Exhibit S.5 Title VI Workshop Summary Sheet (English) ........................................... 456 Exhibit S.6 Title VI Workshop Summary Sheet (Spanish) .......................................... 457 Exhibit S.7 Title VI Workshop Comment Cards (English/Spanish) ............................. 458 Exhibit S.8 Title VI Letter of Support .......................................................................... 459 Exhibit T.1 FAX Language Assistance Plan Training Materials .................................. 462 Exhibit T.2 FAX Language Assistance Plan Training Powerpoint .............................. 467 Exhibit T.3 FAX Language Assistance Plan Operations/Bus Driver Training Powerpoint .............................................................................................................. 471 Exhibit U.1 FAX and Handy Ride Staff Survey Instrument ......................................... 479 Exhibit U.2 Stakeholder Survey Instrument ................................................................ 480

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Page iv

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

IV. APPENDICES

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

APPENDIX A: TITLE VI INFORMATION INCLUDED IN THE SCHEDULE GUIDE

Exhibit A.1 presents an image of page 10 of the FAX Schedule Guide, which includes the Title VI Notice to the Public, which reads:

Fresno Area Express is committed to ensuring that no individual or organization is excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of its programs, activities, or services, or subject to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin as afforded to them by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. For more information, please contact customer service at 621-RIDE.

Exhibit A.2 presents an image of page 11 of the FAX Schedule Guide, which includes the Title VI Notice to the Public in Spanish, which reads:

Fresno Area Express se compromete en azegurarse que ninguna persona u organización sea excluída de participar, se le nieguen los beneficios de sus programas, actividades o servicios, o que estén sujetos a la discriminación basada en la raza, el color o el origen nacional que les brinda el Título VI de la Ley de los Derechos Civiles de 1964, según en mendada.

Para obtener más información, comuníquese con el servicio al cliente al 621-RIDE.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Exhibit A.1 Title VI Information in Schedule Guide (English)

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Exhibit A.2 Title VI Information in Schedule Guide (Spanish)

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

APPENDIX B: FTA CIVIL RIGHTS ASSURANCE STATEMENT

Exhibit B.1 presents an image of the signature page of the Federal Fiscal Year 2022 FTA Certifications and Assurances. It affirms the City of Fresno, as a recipient of fed eral funding, will comply with all federal laws, regulations, and requirements, follow applicable federal guidance, and comply with the Certifications and Assurances applicable to its federal funding program. The document is signed by Joe Vargas , Director of Transportation for the City of Fresno, and Pauline Brickey, Attorney for the City of Fresno.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Exhibit B.1 FY 2022 FTA Certifications and Assurances Signature Page

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

APPENDIX C: FAX BASE SYSTEM

Exhibit C.1 presents an image of the FAX fixed -route system map, which includes bus routes, transit centers, and key activity generators.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express 2022 Title VI Program

Exhibit C.1 FAX Fixed-Route System Map

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

APPENDIX D: LOW-INCOME POPULATION CONCENTRATIONS

WITHIN FAX SERVICE AREA

Exhibit D.1 presents an image of a map identifying low -income population concentrations within the Fresno Urbanized Area. The map is based on the American Community Survey 2015-2019 5-Year Population Estimates.

Concentrations represented on the map reflec t the percentage of the population at less than 150 percent of the poverty level. The average percentage of low -income individuals in the Fresno Urbanized Area is 31.1 percent.

Concentrations of low-income population are differentiated by colors at the c ensus tract level. A solid border outlines the Fresno Urbanized Area. A dashed line indicates all areas within three-quarters of a mile of a FAX fixed route.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

Exhibit D.1 Demographic Map: Low-Income Population

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

APPENDIX E: MINORITY POPULATION CONCENTRATIONS

WITHIN FAX SERVICE AREA

Exhibit E.1 presents an image of a map identifying minority population concentrations within the Fresno Urbanized Area. The map is based on the American Community Survey 201 5-2019 5-Year Population Estimates.

Concentrations represented on the map reflect the percentage of the total population not categorized as “White, non -Hispanic.” The average percentage of minority individuals in the Fresno Urbanized Area is 68.8 percent.

Concentrations of minority population are differentiated by colors at the census tract level. A solid border outlines the Fresno Urbanized Area. A dashed line indicates all areas within three-quarters of a mile of a FAX fixed route.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

Exhibit E.1 Demographic Map: Minority Population

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

APPENDIX F: LIMITED-ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AREAS

Exhibit F.1 presents an image of a map identifying concentrations of populations with Limited-English Proficiency (LEP) within the Fresno Urbanized Area. The map is based on the American Community Survey 201 5-2019 5-Year Population Estimates. Concentrations represented on the map reflect the percentage of the population five years and older who cannot speak English “very well.”

Concentrations of LEP population are differentiated by colors at the census tract level. A solid border outlines the Fresno Urbanized Area. A dashed line indicates all areas within three-quarters of a mile of a FAX fixed route.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

Exhibit F.1 Demographic Map: LEP Population

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

APPENDIX G: SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MEMBERSHIP LIST

Exhibit G.1 2022 SSTAC Membership List
Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC) Membership List
Updated March 2022
Appointment
Resident of/
Geographic
Representation
Term
Expires
Ethnic
Background
Potential transit user 60 years of age or older (minimum of 1) Michael Mendez Jr. Sanger/Fresno County 1-2023 Hispanic Representatives of the local social service providers for seniors (minimum of 2) Sonia Del La Rosa, Fresno County Fresno/Fresno County 6-2023 Hispanic Brian Spaunhurst, Fresno County Public
Works Fresno/Fresno County 1-2023 Caucasian
Potential transit user who is disabled (minimum of 1)
Sarin Wakimian Fresno/Fresno County 6-2023 Caucasian
Representatives of the local social service provider for disabled (minimum of 2) Vidal Medina, RICV Fresno/Fresno County 5-2022 Hispanic Chenier Derrick Fresno/Fresno County African
American
Representative of the local social service provider for persons of limited means (minimum of 1) Hector Medina, Fresno County Fresno/Fresno County 6-2023 Hispanic Representatives from local Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (minimum of 2) Amy Hance, Clovis Transit Clovis/Fresno County 6-2022 Caucasian Thomas Dulin, FEOC/CTSA Fresno/Fresno County 6-2022 Caucasian Moses Stites, FCRTA Fresno/Fresno County 2-2023 Hispanic Darlene Christiansen, FAX Fresno/Fresno County 6-2023 Asian American

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) Membership List
Updated March 2022
Appointment
Resident of/
Geographic
Representation
Term
Expires
Ethnic
Background
Representative of the general public who uses public transit Yonas Paulos Fresno/Fresno County 6-2022 Caucasian
Matthew Gilliam Fresno/Fresno County 10-2023 African
American

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

APPENDIX H: 2022 FAX BUS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

2 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Table of Contents
page
Key Survey Findings 3

Introduction and Methodology 7
Survey Sample Route Characteristics 9
Components of Survey Report 10

Survey Findings 11
Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics 11
Customer Travel Information 14
Trip Characteristics 14
Access to Vehicle 18
Fare Payment 20

Customer Satisfaction with FAX Bus Service 21
Overall Satisfaction 21
Satisfaction with Individual Features of FAX Service 23 Most Important Bus Features 31
FAX Report Card 37

Availability of Information and Communication 39

Appendix 43
Questionnaires (English and Spanish) 44
Frequencies and Open-Ended Responses 55

3 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Fresno Area Express 2018 Customer Satisfaction Report

Key Survey Findings
Fresno Area Express (FAX) has elected to conduct a statistically reliable customer opinion and satisfaction survey among customers of the system. The purpose of the survey is to provide current information and opinions concerning customer satisfaction , travel behavior, and rider demographics regarding the FAX system and to compare the results of this 20 22 study with the results from prior studies, in particular the more recent 2014 and 2018 FAX customer satisfaction studies, and to highlight any changes that may be related to ridership effects of the COVID pandemic.

The survey was conducted through bus stop intercept, online and on -board interviews of 876 FAX passengers, which yields a margin of error of +/-3.3 percent at the 95 percent level of confidence.1

Rider Demographics
• The mean household size is 3.0 persons with nearly one half (49 percent) reporting either a 1-person household (27 percent) or a two-person household (22 percent). This is a notably smaller household size than in 2018 (3.5 persons per household).
• Respondents are primarily Hispanic/Latino (43 percent), White (27 percent), and Black/African American (15 percent), with White riders showing a marked increase from 2018 and Black/African American riders declining.
• Just over two -fifths of respondents (4 1 percent) earn an annual household income of less than $10,000 and another 22 percent earn between $10,000 and $19,999 on an annual basis. The median respondent annual household income is $13,800, which represents a considerable increase over 2018 ($9,300), including 9 percent earning $75,000 or more per year in contrast to only 2 percent in 2018.
• Approximately one-third of respondents (32 percent) are between 18 and 34 years of age with another 36 percent between the ages of 35 and 54. The median age of 41.3 years of age is a quantum leap over 2018, 2014 and 2011 (all approximately 33 years of age). This age increase is likely tied to a substantial decline in school -age riders during the COVID pandemic and is not necessarily reflective of a long-term effect.
• Over three-fifths (62 percent) have a high school education or less while 26 percent have a college degree or more education, again a substantial difference from 2018, 2014, and 2011, where college graduates were only 15-to 17 percent of the ridership.

1 Prior years’ surveys had more respondents than 2022. This decline in numbers had a small impact on the margin of error, which was +/ - 2.3 percent for 1,803 respondents in 2018. The 2022 survey budget constraints and reduced ridership volume that has res ulted from the COVID pandemic led to an objective of 1,000 respondents; however, riders were more oriented to their cell phones and did not want to be diverted from these media to take a survey.

Response rates were down from 6.5 per hour in 2018 to 2.5 per hour in 2022 owing to a smaller rider volume and this growing disinterest among riders in participating. These observations were reported by Rea & Parker’s field supervisor as well as the surveyors assigned to this project . That said, a response from 876 riders can be considered to be exceptional, aided by supplemental online and in-person intercept surveys.

4 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Almost one -half (48 percent) of these respondents are either employed full -time (25 percent), employed part -time (14 percent) , self -employed ( 6 percent) or homemakers ( 3 percent). An additional 17 percent are students (7 percent employed and 10 percent unemployed). As mentioned above, student usage of the bus is quite low, likely due to Fresno State University and other colleges in the Fresno area conducting in-person classes at lower levels than before the COVID pandemic at the time this survey was undertaken. For example, in Spring 2022 (the semester during which the survey was conducted), classes at Fresno State were taught in a variety of modalities, including fully online, virtual, hyflex2, hybrid3, and face-to-face. • Among the remaining respondents, 13 percent are unemployed, 9 percent are retired, and 13 percent are disabled and unable to work. Nine percent of the respondents are active -duty military or a veteran.
• The major residential zip codes of the respondents are as follows: 93706, 93702, and 9 3726 (10 percent each), as they were in the prior surveys.
• One-half of respondents (50 percent) are male.
• English is the primary language spoken in the home for nearly 9 in 10 (88 percent) of respondents.

Customer Travel Characteristics

• The dominant typical trip purposes of FAX customers are work/business (32 percent) followed by errands/personal (20 percent), and shopping (16 percent) . Similar patterns are found in previous survey results.
• Just under three-fifths (59 percent) of FAX customers made 5 or more trips per week. This represents a decline in riding frequency from the survey results in 2018, 2014 and 2011, when 61 percent, 66 percent, and 75 respectively, made 5 or more trips per week. • FAX has both long-term bus riders as well as relatively new riders. Two fifths (40 percent) have ridden FAX for 10 years or more; on the other hand, 34 percent have ridden the system for less than 3 years. The mean length of time customers have ridden FAX is 10.2 years , which is longer than in past years (7.5 years in 2018 and 7.9 years in 2014). • Seven in ten (70 percent) of FAX customers do not have access to a car or other vehicle. This represents a decline among FAX customers who do not have access to a vehicle. In 2018, 77 percent did not have access to a vehicle.
• Among the 30 percent who do have access to a vehicle, over one -fourth (27 percent) use FAX instead of their vehicle because they wish to save gasoline , noting that the bus is less expensive than using their vehicle. Similar results are found in previous survey periods. The 2022 survey did, however, show that environmental concerns are growing as a reason to take the bus (incre asing from 1 percent in 2018 to 9 percent in 2022).
• Four fifths of bus customers (80 percent) are willing to use an electronic fare payment system if such a system becomes available. This finding is consistent with the results in 2018.

Customer Satisfaction with FAX Bus Service

• Customers express substantial overall satisfaction with the FAX bus system. Four fifths ( 80 percent) are either very satisfied (4 4 percent) or sat isfied (36 percent). Another 15 percent are slightly satisfied. On a scale of 1 to 6, where 1 = very satisfied and 6 = very dissatisfied, the mean

2 A Hybrid-Flexible or HyFlex course is a student-centered model of class delivery that can integrate in-class instruction, online synchronous video sessions, or asynchronous content delivery. 3 Hybrid courses (also known as blended courses) replace a portion of traditional face-to-face instruction with web- based online learning (e.g., video lectures, online discussions, or activities).

5 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
satisfaction rating is 1 .9. This is identical to the mean rating in 2018. However, this high overall satisfaction rating represents a notable increase in satisfaction from the 2014 survey period where the mean rating was 2.3. The 2022 satisfaction rating also exceeds the ratings from 2011 where the overall mean satisfaction rating was 2.1.
• The highest overall satisfaction with the FAX bus system is accorded to bus routes 22 (1.66), 20 (1.68), 34 (1.70), and 38 (1.71).
• Customers provide very high mean ratings for drivers’ characteristics including drivers’ driving skills and drivers’ safety awareness (mean of 1.8 each), drivers’ helpfulness and drivers’ courtesy (each with a mean of 1.9 ). These satisfaction means represent a highly consistent level of satisfaction with the 2018 survey and a notable increase in satisfaction from the 2014 and 2011 surveys.
• Regarding time considerations, respondents are most satisfied with the hours of operation on weekdays and on-time performance (each with a mean of 2.1) and express satisfaction with time to complete their trip and frequency of buses (each with a mean of 2. 2). Customers are much less satisfied with the hours of operation on weekends (mean of 2.6) . It is noteworthy that these five categories of time characteristics show strong improvement in satisfaction levels over the 2011 and 2014 surveys periods. The results of the 2018 survey show similar patterns of satisfaction found in the current survey.
• Regarding bus features that revolve around the proximity of bus stops and safety considerations, customers are comfortably satisfied with accessibility for people with disabilities (mean of 1.8) and safety precautions during COVID (mean of 1.9). Customers are also satisfied with closeness of bus stops to home and closeness of bus stops to destination (each with a mean of 1.9) , and safety on- board buses (mean of 2.0). Again, the satisfaction levels in 2018 parallel those found in the current survey, but these results depict distinct improvement in customer satisfaction over the 2014 survey results.
• Customers report particularly good levels of satisfaction with value for price paid (mean of 1.7— the highest rating accorded any of the bus characteristics in the survey ), overall comfort of bus riders (mean of 1.9), and the availability of route/schedule information (mean rating of 2. 0).

Regarding cleanliness, customers are somewhat satisfied with the cleanliness inside the buses (mean rating of 2.3) and with the cleanliness of bus stops/stations (mean rating of 2.5). The current ratings are consistent with the 2018 results but represent a notable improvement from the 2011 and 2014 survey periods.
• Customers identify on-time performance as the most important weighted bus feature (41 percent) followed at some considerable distance by frequency of buses (17 percent). Customers accord the next level of weighted importance to time to complete a trip (9 percent). These same bus service features were given similar levels of weighted importance in the 2014 and 2018 surveys. • Based upon a satisfaction/importance quadrant analysis, the following bus features are the core characteristics that lead to the overall rating of the FAX bus service as very satisfactory: drivers’ courtesy, drivers’ helpfulness, and safety precautions relative to Covid. Potential characteristics for improvement include on-time performance, frequency of buses, time to complete a trip, safety on board buses, safety at bus stops, cleanliness inside buses, and hours of operation on weekends. • The “report card” that was developed for prior surveys shows that FAX has been a consistent success with high customer satisfaction. The grades, themselves, remain as they were in 2018; however, improvement within each grade level is found for almost all characteristics. The level of satisfaction has markedly improved between 2014 and 2011.

Customer Preferences for Receiving FAX Communications

• The preference for electronic communication systems such as the use of rider alerts, the FAX website, and MyFAXBus app has increased substantially in 2022 (55 percent). In 2018, 39 percent preferred such communication technology and in 2014 and 2011, the percentages were 25 percent

6 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
and 6 percent, respectively. The preference for social media as a technology for communication doubled since the 2018 survey.
• Nearly 7 in 10 (69 percent) FAX customers use mobile apps to help plan their bus trips. Among those who use mobile apps for bus trip planning, Google Transit (50 percent) and MyFAX Bus (49 percent) are by far the most widely-used apps.

Conclusion
• There is compelling evidence that FAX customers demonstrate a very high level of satisfaction with the services provided on the bus system. The level of satisfaction for all features of bus service has improved significantly since the previous two survey periods.

7 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Introduction and Methodology
Fresno Area Express (FAX) is governed by the City of Fresno and is the largest public transportation provider in the Central San Joaquin Valley region, with 42 million annual riders. FAX service consists of over 100 buses, approximately 1,500 bus stops, an d 18 fixed routes in the City of Fresno including three major hubs: Downtown Transit Mall; Manchester Transit Center along Blackstone Avenue north of Shields; and a transfer point at River Park Shopping Center in north Fresno.

FAX has elected to contract a statistically reliable customer opinion and satisfaction on-board survey of its customer base. The purpose of the survey is t hreefold – first, to provide current information and opinions concerning customer satisfaction about the bus system, second to compare the results of this 20 22 study with the results of prior satisfaction surveys (in particular, the 2018, 2014, and 2011 customer satisfaction studies), and third, to indicate any effects that the COVID pandemic may have had on travel behavior and bus satisfaction . Rea & Parker Research was selected to conduct the 20 22 study, as it was for the 2018 and 2014 studies as well.

Rea & Parker Research conducted an on-board survey of the Fresno Area Express (FAX) bus system. This on-board survey was supplemented by two other surveys (bus stop intercept conducted by the FAX project team and an online survey using FAX’s Survey Monkey account). These surveys were designed to ascertain the following information:

• Identification of bus riders’ regular bus routes
• Level of satisfaction with various features of the bus system • Overall level of satisfaction with the FAX bus system • Level of importance accorded to various features of the FAX bus system • Travel characteristics of FAX customers including:
o Purpose of typical FAX bus trips
o Length of time customers have ridden FAX
o Number of weekly trips by FAX customers
o Potential Use of Electronic Fare Payment System
o Access to a vehicle and reason for using FAX instead of a vehicle that may be available o Experience with FAX during COVID
• Preferences in how customers prefer that FAX communicate information to them • Use of mobile apps to plan bus trips
• Importance of having Wi-Fi on the bus

8 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Demographic characteristics of the respondents
The final survey questionnaire form ( in both English and Spanish) is provided in the Appendix to this report. Spanish versions of the survey were also distributed to potenti al respondents as needed and as requested.

Rea & Parker Research recruited five local surveyors/interviewers for this project and Rea & Parker Research trained these interviewers regarding the procedures necessary to conduct this on-board bus survey.

Rea & Parker Research also hired a supervisor for this project to coordinate the survey effort on a daily basis and to provide continuous updates to Rea & Parker Research. The training of interviewers took place on February 3, 2022, by way of video conference using the Zoom platform . Follow-up trainings were conducted in person by the field supervisor. The on-board survey process began on February 8, 2022 and was concluded on March 7, 2022. Buses were surveyed between 7am and 6pm in direct proportion to their estimated ridership volume. Surveys were conducted on all seven days of the week. Respondents could complete the survey on-board, return it to Rea & Parker Research by prepaid postage b usiness reply mail or turn it in at the Manchester Transit Station.

The FAX Project Team conducted an intercept bus stop survey that served to supplement the overall survey data file. Rea & Parker Research provided instructions and guidance to the FAX team to ensure that these completed surveys would be compatible with the returned survey s obtained through the on -board survey process. These intercepts were conducted for 2-to-3 hours on seven dates (one Tuesday, three Wednesdays, and three Thursdays) between February 2, 2022 and February 17 , 2022 between 10am and 5pm at the Manchester Transit Center, Downtown A, B, and L Shelters, Kings Canyon and Peach Avenue Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Station, Shaw and Cedar by Fresno State University , and Blackstone and Weldon BRT Station by Fresno City College. Respondents were able to return the completed survey in exactly the same manner as the on -board respondents. Online surveys were advertised on -board buses and were open for respondents between January 25, 2022 and March 7, 2022.

At the completion of the project, five respondents who completed the entire survey at the bus stops or on- board were randomly selected to receive $100 each as a reward for their much -appreciated participation.

The total number of completed survey forms returned from all three surveys (on-board, bus stop intercept, and online) was 876. This yields a margin of error of +/-3.3% at the 95 percent level of confidence. In this current 2022 survey, 95 percent of returned surveys were completed in English and 5 percent were completed in Spanish. In 2014 and 2018, 97 percent were completed in English. Bilingual surveyors and FAX staff participated in this effort, and all COVID protocols were followed.

9 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Survey Sample Route Characteristics
Table 1 shows all returned surveys according to the bus route indicated by the respondent as that route about which they were responding . For the on -board surveys, the route indicated was the route that they were riding when they received the survey. For online respondents, the route indicated was that which they used most often, and for bus stop respondents, the route was the one they had just departed or the one for which they were waiting. Two high-volume bus routes comprise over two-fifths (41 percent) of returned surveys (Route 1 = 31 percent and Route 38 = 10 percent).

Other characteristics of returned surveys are depicted in Tables 2 and 3. Table 2 shows the returned surveys according to the day of the week the surveys were distributed (or in the case of online respondents, the day they travel most often ). Each weekday is wel l-represented with a total of 83 percent of surveys being weekday respondents and just under 1 in 5 (17 percent) weekends. In 2018, 12 percent of returned surveys were distributed on weekends while in 2011, 17 percent (same as current survey) were distributed on weekends. Table 3 indicates the time of day returned surveys were distributed (or, once again, in the case of online respondents, the time that they travel most often). Nearly seven in ten (69 percent) of returned surveys were from mid-to-late mornings and early afternoons between 9:00 am and 3:00 pm. Similarly, in 2018, 68 percent of returned surveys were distributed during this same period.

Table 1
Returned Surveys by Bus Route
(On-Board, Boarding or Alighting at Bus Stops, and Online) Bus Route Returned Surveys
# %
Route 1 268 31
Route 38 92 10
Route 9 78 9
Route 34 69 8
Route 28 59 7
Route 41 57 6
Route 32 52 6
Route 26 44 5
Route 22 36 4
Route 35 26 3
Route 20 23 3
Route 39 19 2
Route 3 15 2
Route 12 15 2
Route 33 13 1
Route 45 9 1
Route 58 1 -----
Total 876 100%

10 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Table 2
Day of Week of Distribution of Returned Surveys
Day of Week Returned Surveys
# %
Monday 133 15
Tuesday 94 11
Wednesday 181 21
Thursday 205 23
Friday 117 13
Saturday 70 8
Sunday 76 9
Total 876 100%

Table 3
Time of Day Returned Surveys Were Distributed
Time of Day Returned Surveys
# %
Early Morning (6 am – 8:59 am) 102 12 Late Morning (9 am - 11:59 am) 241 28 Early Afternoon (12 pm – 2:59 pm) 364 41 Late Afternoon (3:00 pm – 6:00 pm) 169 19 Total 876 100%

Components of the Survey Report

This survey report is divided into four components as follows:

• Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics
• Customer Travel Characteristics
• Customer Satisfaction with FAX Bus Service (including most important features) • Availability of Information and Communication

Charts and tables have been prepared for each of these major components depicting the basic survey results.

Subgroup analyses for different age groups, various levels of education, gender, different income categories, ethnicity of residents, categories of work status, and primary language spoken in the home will

11 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
be presented in succinct bulleted format when statistical significance and relevance warrants such treatment.

Further, the results of this survey will be compared with the results of the 2018, 2014, and 2011 bus satisfaction surveys , again when warranted , where such analysis is feasible and when questions are comparable. Frequencies for all survey questions, lists of open-ended responses, and the survey instrument itself are contained in the Appendix.

Survey Findings
Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics
Table 4 presents selected demographic characteristics of the survey respondents. One half of respondents (50 percent) are male, and English is the primary language spoken in the home for nearly 9 in 10 ( 88 percent) of respondents. The mean household size is 3.0 persons with nearly one half (49 percent) reporting either a 1-person household (27 percent) or a two-person household (22 percent). This is a notably smaller household size than in 2018 (3.5 persons per household). Respondents are primarily Hispanic/Latino (43 percent), White (27 percent), and Black/African American (15 percent), with White riders showing a marked increase from 2018 and Black/African American riders declining.

Just over two-fifths of respondents (41 percent) earn an annual household income of less than $10,000 and another 22 percent earn between $10,000 and $19,999 on an annual basis. The median respondent annual household income is $ 13,800, which represents a considerab le increase over 2018 ($9,300), including 9 percent earning $75,000 or more per year in contrast to only 2 percent in 2018.

Approximately one-third of respondents (32 percent) are between 18 and 34 years of age with another 36 percent between the ages of 35 and 54. The median age of 41.3 years of age is a quantum leap over 2018, 2014 and 2011 (all approximately 33 years of age). This age increase is likely tied to a substantial decline in school-age riders during the COVID pandemic and is not necessarily reflective of a long-term effect.

Over three-fifths (62 percent) have a high school education or less while 26 percent have a college degree or more education, again a substantial difference from 2018, 2014, and 2011, where college graduates were only 15 percent-to-17 percent of the ridership.

Almost one-half (48 percent) of these respondents are either employed full -time (25 percent), employed part-time (14 percent), self-employed (6 percent) or homemakers (3 percent). An additional 17 percent are students (7 percent employed and 10 percent unemployed). As mentioned above student usage of the bus is quite low , likely due to Fresno State University and other colleges in the Fresno area conducting in-

12 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
person classes at lower levels than before the COVID pandemic at the time this survey was undertaken. For example, in Spring 2022 (the semester during which the survey was conducted), classes at Fresno State were taught in a variety of modalities, including fully online, virtual, hyflex4, hybrid5, and face-to-face.

Among the remaining respondents, 13 p ercent are unemployed, 9 percent are retired, and 13 percent are disabled and unable to work. Nine percent of the respondents are active -duty military or a veteran. The major residential zip codes of the respondents are as follows: 93706, 93702, and 93726 (10 percent each), as they were in the prior surveys.

Table 4
Fresno Area Express (FAX) Customer Demographics
Characteristic 2022 2018 2014 2011
Work Status
Employed Full-Time 25% 20% 17% 27%
Employed Part-Time 14% 17% 19% 14%
Self-Employed 6% 5% 4% 2%
Student and Employed 7% 8% 6%
28% a
Student and Not Employed 10% 16% 15%
Homemaker 3% 3% 5% 4%
Retired 9% 6% 7% 7%
Unemployed 13% 14% 16% 16%
Disabled and Unable to Work 13% 11% 11% 2%
a 2011 made no distinction between employed and not employed students

Age
Under 18 6% 8% 7% 11%
18-to-34 32% 48% 48% 45%
35-to-54 36% 27% 26% 28%
55-to-74 23% 16% 17% 14%
75 and Older 3% 1% 2% 2%
Median Age 41.3 33.1 33.2 32.7

Education
Less than 8th Grade 6% 4% 5% 2%
Some High School 13% 17% 16% 19%
High School Graduate 43% 50% 48% 49%
Vocational/Technical School 12% 12% 15% 15%
College Graduate 26% 17% 16% 15%
*2022: 4.5% post-graduate degrees included in college graduate category

4 A Hybrid-Flexible or HyFlex course is a student-centered model of class delivery that can integrate in-class instruction, online synchronous video sessions, or asynchronous content delivery. 4 Hybrid courses (also known as blended courses) replace a portion of traditional face-to-face instruction with web- based online learning (e.g., video lectures, online discussions, or activities).

13 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Table 4 -- continued
Fresno Area Express (FAX) Customer Demographics
Characteristic 2022 2018 2014 2011
Ethnicity
Hispanic/Latino 43% 47% 46% 38%
White 27% 18% 25% 26%
Black/African American 15% 22% 18% 28%
Asian 3%a 3%b 6%c 4%
American Indian/Alaska Native 2% 3% 2% 2%
Pacific Islander ----d -----d 1% 1%
Middle Eastern ----d -----d ----d
1%e Mixed and Other Ethnicities 10%e 7% 2%
a In 2022, 0.6% identified themselves as Hmong, 0.3% as Asian Indian, 0.3% as Laotian, 0.2% as Cambodian, 0.2% as Vietnamese, and 0.1% as Chinese, Indonesian, or Malaysian. b In 2018, 0.6% identified themselves as Hmong, 0.3% as Filipino, and 3% as Cambodian.
c In 2014, more than one-half (3% of the Asian/SE Asian respondents) indicated that they were Hmong and another 1% were Filipino. In 2011, 1% were Filipino and 1.5% identified themselves as Hmong. d Less than 0.5%
e3% are mixed Hispanic and White, 2% Hispanic and Black, 2% Hispanic and Asian, 2% American Indian with Black or White, and 1% Black and White
Annual Household Income f
Less than $10,000 41% 54% 57% 33%
$10,000-$19,999 22% 22% 25% 38%
$20,000-$29,999 10% 11% 9% 17%
$30,000-$39,999 8% 5% 5% 9%
$40,000-$49,999 5% 4% 2% 2%
$50,000 -$74,999 5% 2% 2% 1%
$75,000 - $99,999 4% 2% ------- --------
$100,000 and more 5% -------- -------- --------
Median Household Income $13,800 $9,300 $8,700 $14,500
f These incomes from year-to-year are not directly comparable. In 2011, 33% refused to provide their income. In 2014 14% refused. In 2018 only 9% refused, and in 2022,13% refused. In 2014, Highest income category provided in 2014 and 2011 surveys was $50,000 and above. In 2018, there were additional categories for $50,000-$74,999, $75,000-$99,999 and $100,000 or more. 2018 combined categories over $75,000.

Gender
Male 50% 48% 41% 49%
Female 49% 52% 59% 51%
Other g 1% -------- -------- --------
g Other is a new category in 2022
Primary Language in Homeh
English 88% 91% 89% --------
Spanish or Spanish Creole 11% 8% 8% --------
Various Asian Languages 1% 1% 2% --------
h Despite this preponderance of English as the primary language spoken at home, 21% indicated that they consider themselves to be limited in their use of English, and another 5% do not know whether they are limited or not.

Active-Duty Military or Veteran i
Yes 9% -------- -------- --------
No 91% -------- -------- --------
i New question in 2022

14 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Table 4 -- continued
Fresno Area Express (FAX) Customer Demographics
Characteristic 2022 2018 2014 2011
Residential Zip Code
93702 10% 10% 11% ---------
93726 10% 10% 12% ---------
93727 8% 10% 7% ---------
93705 8% 6% 8% ---------
93703 7% 6% 6% ---------
93722 6% 7% 8% ---------
93704 5% 5% 3% ---------
93728 5% 5% 4% ---------
93710 4% 6% 6% ---------
93701 4% 5% 3% ---------
93711 3% 2% 2% --------
93725 3% 3% 4% ---------

Household Size
1 person 27% 23% --------- ---------
2 persons 22% 18% --------- ---------
3 persons 18% 16% --------- ---------
4 persons 13% 15% --------- ---------
5 persons 8% 12% --------- ---------
6 persons 6% 7% --------- ---------
7-8 persons 4% 6% --------- ---------
9 or more persons 2% 3% --------- ---------
Mean Household Size 3.0 persons 3.5 persons

Customer Travel Information
Trip Characteristics

Chart 1 shows the purpose of the customers’ typical FAX bus trip. In the current 2022 survey, the typical trip purposes of bus customers are work/business (32 percent), followed by errands/personal (20 percent), and shopping (16 percent). In 2018 and 2014, the patterns are similar in that work/business is the dominant trip purpose (2018 = 26 percent and in 2014 = 31 percent). Similarities also exist in that errands/personal is also a popular trip purpose in both 2018 and 2014 (2018 = 17 percent and 2014 = 14 percent). While college was a frequent bus trip in 2018 (19 percent) and in 2014 (23 percent), this trip purpose was fourth in the ranking of trip purposes in the current 2022 survey (12 percent). This lower ranking is very likely the result of Fresno State University and other colleges in the Fresno area conducting in-person classes at lower levels than before the COVID pandemic at the time this survey was undertaken. For example, in Spring 2022 (the semester during which the survey was conducted), classes at Fresno State were taught in a variety of modalities, including fully online, virtual, hyflex, hybrid, and face -to-face. Among the remaining

15 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
respondents, 13 percent are unemployed, 9 percent are retired, and 13 percent are disabled and unable to work. Nine percent of the respondents are active-duty military or a veteran.

The following subgroups are more likely to identify personal errands as a typical trip purpose:

• Vocational school students (24.0 percent), high school graduates (21.7 percent), and college graduates (21.0 percent) versus those with some high school education (12.4 percent). • Respondents who have incomes in the $30,000 - $39,999 range (34.0 percent) use the bus for personal errands more than other income levels.

The following subgroup is more likely to identify shopping as a typical trip purpose:
• Females (19.0 percent) as opposed to males (13.5 percent).

The following subgroup is more likely to identify high school, middle school, or elementary sch ool as a typical trip purpose:

• Females (11.3 percent) versus males (6.5 percent).

The following subgroup is more likely to identify college as a typical trip purpose:
• Respondents who make 8 or fewer trips per week (14.1 percent) as opposed to those who m ake 9 or more trips per week (7.7 percent).

Chart 2 shows that just over two-fifths (41 percent) of FAX customers made fewer than 5 trips per week.

This represents a decline in riding frequency from the 2018, 2014, and 2011 survey results when 39 percent, 34 percent and 25 percent respectively made fewer than 5 trips per week. Also, 15 percent of FAX customers made 13 or more trips per week in 2022 while approximately one -fourth of customers in 2011 made this relatively high number of trips per week. The median number of trips per week in 2022 is 6 trips and this is similar to the median number of trips in 2018 (5 trips) and in 2014 (6 trips). However, these three survey periods represent a decidedly lower median number of trips per week than the number recorded in 2011 (8 trips).

The following subgroups tend to make a higher number of trips per week:
• Customer of mixed ethnicities (mean of 11.37 trips) versus Hispanics (mean of 7.85 trips). • Disabled individuals (mean of 10.32 trips) as opposed to those who are self-employed (mean of 5.4 trips).
• Customers who have less than an eighth -grade education (mean of 10.94 trips) versus college graduates (mean of 6.41 trips).

16 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
32%
20%
16%
12%
9%
7%
2% 2%
26%
17%
11%
19%
9% 8%
6%
4%
31%
14%
11%
23%
9%
7%
3%
2%
Chart 1
Purpose of Typical Bus Trip
2022 2018 2014
Other category includes:
church, volunteer work,
and "just to ride/pass time"

17 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

It is indicated in Chart 3 that FAX has both long -term bus riders as well as relatively new riders. For example, two-fifths (40 percent) have ridden FAX for 10 years or more; on the other hand, 34 percent have ridden the system for less than 3 years. The mean length of time custo mers have been riding FAX is 10.2 years, which is longer than in past years (7.5 years in 2018 and 7.9 years in 2014). In the current year 2022, 79 percent of bus customers have been riding FAX for one year or more. This percentage is slightly lower than in the 2018 and 2014 survey periods. (In 2018, 83 percent of bus customers have been riding FAX for one year or more and in 2014, 87 percent had been riding FAX for one year or more). The current year is more consistent with the results in 2011 where 78 perce nt of customers rode the system for one year or more.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
FEWER THAN 5 TRIPS

PER WEEK
5-8 TRIPS PER WEEK 9-12 TRIPS PER WEEK 13 OR MORE TRIPS PER WEEK
41%
25%
19%
15%
39%
28%
19%
14%
34%
30%
23%
13%
25%
27%
24% 24%
Chart 2
Number of Weekly Trips by FAX Customers
2022 2018 2014 2011
2022: Mean = 8.1 trips; Median = 6 trips
2018: Mean = 7.5 trips; Median = 5 trips
2014: Mean = 7.9 trips; Median = 6 trips
2011: Median = 8 trips

18 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

The following subgroups tend to have a longer tenure using the FAX bus system. • Customers with vocational school training (mean of 13.81 years) versus high school graduates (mean of 9.91 years) and college graduates (mean of 8.81 years). • Disabled individuals (mean of 10.32 years) and retired customers (mean of 9.93 years) versus homemakers (mean of 7.08 years), full-time employees (mean of 7.65 years), students who are not employed (mean of 7.70 years), students who are employed (mean of 7.89 years), and those who are self-employed (mean of 7.89 years).

Access to Vehicle
Chart 4 indicates that in the current survey 70 percent do not have access to a car or other vehicle. This is a notable decline among FAX customers who do not have access to a car. In 2018 and in 2011, 77 percent of customers did not have access to a vehicle. In 2014, 79 percent of customers had no access to a vehicle.

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%

LESS THAN ONE
YEAR

ONE-TO-LESS
THAN 3 YEARS

THREE-TO-LESS
THAN 5 YEARS

FIVE-TO-LESS
THAN 10 YEARS

TEN-TO-LESS
THAN 20 YEARS

TWENTY OR

MORE YEARS
21%
13%
11%
15%
18%
22%
17%
19%
15% 15%
19%
15%
13%
18%
14%
20% 20%
15%
Chart 3
Length of Time Riding FAX
2022 Mean =10.2 years: Median = 5 years
2018 Mean = 7.5 years: Median = 5 years
2014 Mean = 7.9 years: Median = 6 years
2022 2018 2014
Only comparable data available for
2011 show tenure of 1 year or more
in 2011 at 78% vs. 79% in 2022,

19 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

The following subgroups tend to have access to a car or other vehicle:
• Customers whose dominant language is English (31.4 percent) versus those whose dominant language is Spanish (12.2 percent).
• Respondents who do not have limited English proficiency (32.8 percent) as opposed to those who do have limited English proficiency (21.5 percent).
• Whites (32.9 percent) and Asians (35.5 percent) versus Hispanics (26.3 percent) and African Americans (23.2 percent).
• College graduates a nd more education (45.0 percent) versus High School graduates and less education (22.8 percent).
• Customers who make eight or fewer trips per week (35.4 percent) versus those who make 9 or more trips per week (19.5 percent).

Among the 30 percent who do have access to a vehicle, well over one fourth (27 percent) use FAX instead of their vehicle because they wish to save gasoline , noting that the bus is less expensive than using their vehicle. Another 18 percent indicate that their shared vehicle is not always available, and 13 percent stated that the bus is easier and more relaxing. Similar results are found in previous survey periods. For example, in 2018, 35 percent reported that they do not use their vehicle because the bus is less expensive to use than their car. Another 15 percent indicated that their shared vehicle is not always available, and 12 percent reported that their ride is not always available. In 2014, 29 percent indicated that the bus is less expensive 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
YES NO
30%
70%
23%
77%
21%
79%
23%
77%
Chart 4
Access to Car or Other Vehicle?
2022 2018 2014 2011

20 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
to use, another 21 percent indicated that their shared vehicle is not always available, and 14 percent were unsure of the availability of their ride. Customers in 2011 expressed similar reasons for riding the bus instead of using their vehicle: save gas/bus cheaper (32 percent) and their vehicle is shared and not readily available (20 percent) (Chart 5). The 2022 survey did show that environmental concerns are growing as a reason to take the bus (increasing from 1 percent in 2018 to 9 percent in 2022)

Fare Payment

Four fifths (80 percent) of bus customers are willing to use an electronic fare payment system if such a system becomes available (Chart 6). This result is consistent with the 2018 survey result where 78 percent of customers were willing to use an electronic fare system to pay their fare.

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
2022 2018 2014
27%
35%
29%
18%
15%
21%
13%
11%
7%
9%
1%
5%
7%
12%
14%
7…
10%
2%
6%
1% 2%3%
10% 11%
3% 4%
2%3%
Chart 5
Reasons for Riding FAX
(among 30% who have vehicle available)
Save gasoline--Bus is less expensive than vehicle Shared vehicle not available Bus is easier/more relaxing Good for environment
Ride not available Car being repaired/not reliable
Walk/Exercise/Take Bicycle Cannot drive/No license
Primary reasons cited in 2011 report:

Save gas/Bus cheaper = 32%
Car is being repaired = 25%
Share vehicle = 20%
Cannot drive = 11%

21 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
The following two subgroups are more willing to use an electronic fare payment system if one were available.

• Younger customers (18-54 years of age -- 84.1 percent) versus older customers (55 and over -- 69.2 percent).
• Females (83.7 percent) as opposed to males (76.1 percent).

Customer Satisfaction with FAX Bus Service

Overall Satisfaction
Chart 7 reports that customers express substantial overall satisfaction with the FAX bus system. Four fifths (80 percent) are either very satisfied (44 percent) or satisfied (36 percent). This represents a notable increase in satisfaction from the 2014 survey period where two thirds (66 percent) of customers reported that they were either very satisfied or satisfied with the FAX bus system. This finding of higher levels of satisfaction with the FAX bus system is further demonstrated by the mean satisfaction ratings. On a scale of 1 to 6, where 1 = very satisfied and 6 = very dissatisfied, the overall mean bus satisfaction rating is 1.9. This mean rating is identical to the mean satisfaction rating in the 2018 survey. Most noteworthy, however, is that the 2022 and 2018 mean rating of 1.9 is higher than the mean satisfaction ratings in 2014 (2.3) and 2011 (2.1).

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
YES NO
80%
20%
78%
22%
Chart 6
Use Electronic Fare Payment System, if Available?
2022 2018

22 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

The following subgroup tend s to be even more satisfied overall with the FAX b us system than are other groups:
• Employed students (mean of 1.56), unemployed individuals (mean of 1.73), and part time workers (mean of 1.74) versus full time workers (mean of 2.14).

Chart 8 indicates the respondents’ overall satisfaction with the FAX bus system according to bus route.

Satisfaction ratings range from 1.66 to 2.40. Route 33 has a low mean rating of 2.56 but this is derived from only 9 responses and, therefore, this rating has questionable reliability . The highest levels of satisfaction are accorded to bus routes 22 (1.66), 20 (1.68), 34 (1.70), and 38 (1.71). Route 45, which has undergone recent route and schedule modifications, has an even higher mean satisfaction rating of 1.44 but this is also derived from only 9 responses and, therefore, this rating , too, has a degree of questionable reliability. Route 1, the most heavily traveled route in the FAX system, experienced a small decline fr om

1.80 to 1.87 between 2018 and 2022. In 2018, satisfaction ratings ranged from 1.79 to 2.17 – a narrower range than in 2022.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
VERY

SATISFIED

SATISFIED SLIGHTLY

SATISFIED

SLIGHTLY

DISSATISFIED

DISSATISFIED VERY

DISSATISFIED
44%
36%
13%
3%
2% 2%
42%
37%
15%
3% 2% 1%
29%
37%
20%
7%
3% 4%
28%
44%
20%
5%
1% 2%
Chart 7
Satisfaction with Overall Service
Scale = 1-to-6 (1 = Very Satisfied)
2022 2018 2014 2011
2022: Percentage Very Satisfied or Satisfied = 80%
Mean Satisfaction = 1.9
2018: Percentage Very Satisfied or Satisfied = 79%
Mean Satisfaction = 1.9
2014: Percentage Very Satisfied or Satisfied = 66%
Mean Satisfaction = 2.3
2011: Percentage Very Satisfied or Satisfied = 72%
Mean Satisfaction = 2.1

23 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction with Individual Features of FAX Service

Chart 9 shows the level of customer satisfaction regarding bus features that are associated with the drivers’ characteristics. Customers are particularly satisfied with the drivers’ driving skills and drivers’ safety awareness (mean of 1.8 each ). Satisfaction i n these areas is closely followed by drivers’ helpfulness and drivers’ courtesy (each with a mean of 1.9). These satisfaction means among the four driver characteristics represent a highly consistent level of satisfaction with the 2018 survey. However, the levels of satisfaction reported in 2022 and 2018 are notably higher than the satisfaction levels found in 2014 and 2011. In 2014, the means ranged from 2.1 to 2.4) and in 2011, the means ranged from 2.1 to 2.3). Further highlighting this marked increase in satisfaction with drivers, the percentage of respondents who are very satisfied in 2022 increased by between 1 5 percent (drivers’ driving skills and drivers’ safety awareness) and 18 percent (drivers’ courtesy) from the responses in 2014.

1.001.201.401.601.802.002.202.402.60
1 3
9 12
20 22
26 28
32 33
34 35
38 39
41 45
58 1.87

2.00 1.79

2.00 1.68

1.66 1.89

1.87 2.00

2.56 1.70

2.40 1.71

2.27 2.19

1.44 1.00

1.80 1.90

1.80 1.94

1.94 1.99

1.87 2.17

2.02 1.92

1.96 1.79

1.82 2.00
Chart 8
Overall Satisfaction by Bus Route
1= Very Satisfied---6 = Very Dissatified
Overall Means: 2022 = 1.88---2018 = 1.89
2022 2018
(Only 9 responses on Route 33 in 2022 and 6 responses in 2018 ) (Only 1 response on Route 58 in both 2022 and 2018)
(Route 39 was combined with Route 26 in 2018)
(Only 9 responses in 2022, but 51 in 2018)

24 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

1.5 1.7

1.9 2.1

2.3 2.5

2.7 2.9

DRIVERS' DRIVING SKILLS DRIVERS' SAFETY

AWARENESS

DRIVERS' HELPFULNESS DRIVERS' COURTESY

1.8 1.8

1.9 1.9

1.8 1.8

1.9 2.0

2.1 2.2

2.3 2.4

2.1 2.1

2.2 2.3
Chart 9
Mean Satisfaction Ratings--Drivers' Characteristics
(Scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022 2018 2014 2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 48% 2022 = 46% 2022 = 46% 2022 = 44% 2018 = 45% 2018 = 46% 2018 = 43% 2018 = 41% 2014 = 33% 2014 = 31% 2014 = 30% 2014 = 26% 2011 = 34% 2011 = 34% 2011= 29% 2011 = 25%

25 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
The following subgroup tends to be more satisfied with bus drivers’ skills:
• Customers who are active-duty U.S military or a U.S. Veteran (mean of 1.54) as opposed to those without such military service (mean of 1.80).

Chart 10 depicts the level of customer satisfaction regarding bus features most related to time considerations. Among these bus trip characteristics, respondents are most satisfied with the hours of operation on weekdays and on -time performance (each with a mean of 2.1) and they also express satisfaction with frequency of buses and time to complete a trip (each with a mean of 2.2). Customers are less satisfied with the hours of operation on weekends (mean of 2.6). The data reveal similar patterns of satisfaction in the 2018 survey. It is noteworthy that these five categories of time characteristics show strong improvement in the level of customer satisfaction over the 2014 and 2011 survey periods. In 2014, the means for these characteristics ranged from 2.7 to 3.3 and in 2011, the range of means was 2.7 to 4.0. From 2014 to 2022, improvements in the percentage of respondents who are very satisfied with these time characteristics range from an 11 percent improvement for weekend hours of operation to 17 percent improvement for frequency of buses.

The following subgroup tends to be more satisfied with the hours of operation on weekdays:
• Customers who are disabled and unable to work (mean of 1.70) as opposed to those who a re employed full time (mean of 2.29).

The following four subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the frequency of buses:

• Workers who are employed part time (mean of 2.00) versus those who are employed full time (mean of 2.51).
• Respondents with incomes of under $20,000 (mean of 2.13) versus respondents with incomes of $30,000 - $39,999 (mean of 2.84).
• Customers with limited English proficiency (mean of 1.97) versus those who are proficient in English (mean of 2.36).
• Blacks/African Americans (mean of 1.86) as opposed to Whites (mean of 2.32) an d Hispanics (mean of 2.33).

The following subgroup tends to be more satisfied with the time it takes to complete their bus trip:

• Customers whose annual income is between $10,000 and $19,999 (mean of 2.19) versus those who earn $100,000 or more (mean of 2.78).

The following two subgroups tend to be more satisfied with the hours of operation on weekends:

• Customers with limited English proficiency (mean of 2.36) versus those who are proficient in English (mean of 2.75).
• Customers who live in 3-person households (mean of 2.49), 4 -person households (mean of 2.43), and 5-person households (mean of 2.47) as opposed to those who live in 2-person households (mean of 6.0).

26 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

1.8 2.3

2.8 3.3

3.8 4.3

2.1 2.1

2.2 2.2

2.6 2.1

2.3 2.3 2.3

2.6 2.7 2.7

2.8 2.7

3.3 2.9

2.7 2.8

3.0 4.0
Chart 10
Mean Satisfaction Ratings--Time Characteristics
(Scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022 2018 2014 2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 40% 2022 = 37% 2022 = 34% 2022 = 33% 2022 = 30% 2018 = 38% 2018 = 31% 2018 = 30% 2018 = 30% 2018 = 28% 2014 = 25% 2014 = 20% 2014 = 17% 2014 = 18% 2014 = 19% 2011 = 15% 2011 = 17% 2011 = 15% 2011 = 13% 2011 = 9%

27 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

The level of customer satisfaction with bus features that revolve around the p roximity of bus stops and safety considerations is presented in Chart 11. Customers are comfortably satisfied with accessibility for people with disabilities (mean of 1.8) and safety precautions during Covid (mean of 1.9). Customers are also satisfied with the following features : closeness of bus stops to home and closeness of bus stops to destination (each with a mean of 1.9), and safety on-board buses (mean of 2.0). Customers express a similar level of satisfaction with safety at bus stops/stations (mean of 2.2). While it is evident that the 2022 levels of satisfaction are consistent with the 2018 ratings, it is clear that these characteristics regarding safety and proximity of bus stops depict distinct improvement s in customer satisfaction over the 2014 survey results where means ranged from 2.2 to 2.5. From 2014 to 2022, improvements to the percentage of respondents who are very satisfied with these safety and proximity characteristics range from 10 percent improvement in closeness of bus stops to home and closeness of bus stops to destination to 12 percent improvement for safety on board buses.

The following subgroup tends to be more satisfied with accessibility for people with disabilities:
• Females (mean of 1.77) versus males (mean of 1.92).

The following subgroup tends to be more satisfied with closeness of bus stops to home:
• Customers who earn an annual income of less than $40,000 (mean of 1.86) versus those who earn between $75,000 and $99,000 (mean of 2.91).

The following subgroup tends to be more satisfied with the closeness of bus stops to their destination:
• Males (1.85) as opposed to females (mean of 2.01).

The following subgroups tend to be more satisfied with personal safety at bus stops and stations:
• Customers who earn an annual income of less than $10,000 (mean of 2.04) versus those who earn $100.000 or more (mean of 2.77).
• Workers who are self-employed (mean of 1.79) and those who are disabled (mean of 1.99) versus those who are employed on a full-time basis (mean of 2.56) and homemakers (mean of 2.83).

28 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

1.5 1.7

1.9 2.1

2.3 2.5

2.7 2.9

ACCESSIBILITY

FOR PEOPLE
WITH

DISABILITIES
SAFETY

PRECAUTIONS

DURING COVID

CLOSENESS OF

BUS STOPS TO
HOME

CLOSENESS OF

BUS STOPS TO

DESTINATION

SAFETY ON-

BOARD BUSES

SAFETY AT BUS

STOPS/STATIONS

1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9

2.0 2.2

2.0 2.0 2.0

2.22.2 2.2

2.4 2.5

2.3 2.3

1.7 2.1
Chart 11
Mean Satisfaction Ratings--Safety/Proximity of Bus
Stops
(Scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022 2018 2014 2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 45% 2022 = 47% 2022 = 44% 2022 = 41% 2022 = 38% 2022 = 33% 2018 = 43% 2018 = 41% 2018 = 36% 2018 = 31% 2014 = 34% 2014 = 31% 2014 = 26% 2014 = 22% 2011 = 31% 2011 = 29% 2011 = 54%* 2011 = 43%* * In 2011, safety questions were asked in a diffferent section of the questionnaire and were on a 4-point scale.

The means and percentages have been adjusted but readers are cautioned not to draw significant comparisons based upon these differences between 2022, 2018 and 2014 data versus data from 2011. *
*

29 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Chart 12 shows mean satisfaction ratings associated with comfort, cleanliness, information, and value.

Customers report high satisfaction with the quality of audio/visual announcements (mean of 1.9) .

Regarding cleanliness, customers are somewhat satisfied with the cleanliness inside the buses (mean rating of 2.3) and less so with the cleanliness of bus stops/stations (mean rating of 2.5). Customer ratings on cleanliness of bus stops as well as cleanliness inside buses are consistent with the ratings of the 2018 survey.

It is noteworthy that these ratings associated with cleanliness have modestly improved since the 2014 and 2011 surveys. Additionally, customers report particularly good levels of satisfaction wit h value for price paid (mean of 1.7—the highest among all bus characteristics in the survey), overall comfort of the bus ride (mean of 1.9), and the availability of route/schedule information (mean rating of 2.0). The current ratings for these three characteristics represent a distinct improvement in satisfaction from the 2014 survey where mean ratings ranged from 2.4 to 2.5, and the 2011 survey where mean ratings ranged from 2.3 to 2.7. From 2014 to 2022, improvements to the percentage of respondents who are very satisfied with these comfort, cleanliness, information, and value characteristics range from a 13 percent improvement for availability of route/schedule info to 26 percent improvement for value for price paid.

The following subgroups tend to be more satisfied with the value they receive for the price paid:

• Customers who are retired (mean of 1.38) as opposed to those who work on a full-time basis (mean of 1.87).
• Customers over the age of 55 (mean of 1.57) as opposed to those under 18 (mean of 2.07).

30 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

1.2 1.6
2 2.4

2.8 3.2

3.6 1.7

1.9 1.9

2.0 2.3

2.5 2.0 2.0

2.1 2.4

2.5 2.4 2.4

2.5 2.9 2.9

2.7 2.3

2.6 2.6

2.8 Chart 12
Mean Satisfaction Ratings--
Comfort/Cleanliness/Information/Value
(scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022 2018 2014 2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 53% 2022 = 46% 2022 = 44% 2022 = 39% 2022 =31% 2022 = 30% 2018 = 41% 2018 = 39% 2018 = 39% 2018 = 29% 2018 = 27% 2014 = 27% 2014 = 24% 2014 = 26% 2014 = 16% 2014 = 16% 2011 = 22% 2011 = 23% 2011 = 24% 2011 = 14% 2011 = 18%

31 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Most Important Bus Features

Respondents were asked to indicate the bus feature that they considered to be most important and the one they considered to be second most important. Chart 13 presents the more important bus service features and Chart 14 shows the second-most important bus service features. In each of these charts, the responses were combined and weighted for the first and second choices.

With reference to Chart 13 , customers identify on -time performance as the most important weighted feature (41 percent) followed at some distance by frequency of buses (17 percent). Customers accord the next level of importance to time to complete trip (9 percent). These same bus service features demonstrated similar levels of weighted importance in the 2014 and 2018 surveys.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

ON-TIME PERFORMANCE

FREQUENCY OF BUSES

TIME TO COMPLETE TRIP

SAFETY ON-BOARD BUSES

HOURS OF OPERATION--

WEEKENDS

DRIVERS' COURTESY

SAFETY AT BUS STOPS/STATIONS

CLEANLINESS INSIDE BUSES

DRIVERS' HELPFULNESS

SAFETY PRECAUTIONS DURING
COVID
41%
17%
9%
7%
7%
7%
7%
7%
7%
6%
35%
18%
13%
10%
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
32%
17%
12%
8%
11%
11%
4%
7%
5%
Chart 13
Most Important Bus Service Features*
2022 2018
* Respondents could provide one response for most
important feature and a second response for next
in importance. The total of percentages has been
weighted to account for these two responses.

The sum of percentages for Charts 13 and 14 exceeds
100% because both responses have been tallied.

In 2011, some of the same, but not all, 2018 and 2014
features were measured forimportance.

Most important in 2011 were: Buses Running
On Time (46%); Drivers' Driving Skills (39%);
Safety On-Board the Bus (28%); Frequency of Buses
(23%); Drivers' Customer Service (19%); and Bus
Hours of Operation (14%--Weekday/Weekend
not distinguished).

Note that the 2011 percentage calculations were not
weighted and are, in consequence, disproportionately

32 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Regarding Chart 14 (less important bus service features), the range of weighted percentages is very narrow (from a high of 5 percent (availability of route/schedule info) to a low of 2 percent (quality of audio/visual announcements). The importance associated with these features in 2018 and 2014 is similar to the 2022 ratings. There are two notable exceptions with lower importance in 2022: hour of operation – weekdays (8 percent in 2014 and 2018 versus 4 percent in 2022) and drivers’ driving skills (8 percent in 2018 and 7 percent in 2014 versus 3 percent in 2022).

The following subgroups tend to identify driver helpfulness as the most important bus service feature:

• Males (5.9 percent) versus females (3.1 percent).
• Customers with limited English proficiency (8.1 percent) as opposed to those who have English proficiency (3.3 percent).
• Customers whose dominant language is Spanish (11.3 percent) versus those whose dominant language is English (3.6 percent).

The following subgroups tend to identify frequency of buses as the most important bus service feature:

• Customers who are proficient in English (10.3 percent) versus those who have limited English proficiency (7.3 percent).
• Customers whose dominant language is Spanish (12.7 percent) versus those whose dominant language is English (8.8 percent).

The following subgroups tend to identify personal safety at bus stops and stations as the most important bus service feature:

• Customers with limited English proficiency (8.9 percent) as opposed to those who have English proficiency (1.9 percent).
• Customers whose dominant language is Spanish (7.0 percent) versus those whose dominant language is English (2.7 percent).

The following subgroups identify the following bus features as most important:

• Value provided for the price paid: males (3.6 percent) versus females (1.8 percent). • Personal safety on board the bus: females (4.9 percent) as opposed to males (3.3 percent). • On-time performance: Customers with limited English proficiency (33.1 percent) as opposed to those who have English proficiency (29.3 percent).
• Closeness of bus stops to home: Customers whose dominant language is Spanish (11.1 percent) versus those whose dominant language is English (1.4 percent).

33 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

AVAILABILITY OF

ROUTE/SCHEDULE INFO

HOURS OF OPERATION--

WEEKDAYS

CLOSENESS OF BUS STOPS TO
HOME

VALUE FOR PRICE PAID

DRIVERS' SAFETY AWARENESS

CLEANLINESS OF BUS

STOPS/STATIONS

CLOSENESS OF BUS STOPS TO

DESTINATION

DRIVERS' DRIVING SKILLS

OVERALL COMFORT OF BUS
RIDES

ACCESSIBILITY FOR PEOPLE

WITH DISABILITIES

QUALITY OF AUDIO/VISUAL

ANNOUNCEMENTS
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
3%
3%
3%
2%
3%
8%
6%
5%
5%
4%
3%
8%
3%
3%
8%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
7%
4%
Chart 14
Second Most Important Bus Service Features*
2022 2018 2014
* Respondents could provide one response for most
important feature and a second response for next
in importance. The total of percentages has been
weighted to account for these two responses.

The sum of percentages for Charts 13 and 14 exceeds
100% because both responses have been tallied.

34 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Chart 15 shows that FAX customers give a great deal of importance to the availability of Wi-Fi on buses.

Nearly three-fifths (56 percent) either feel that Wi-Fi on buses is very important (41 percent) or important (15 percent). Another 17 percent feel that Wi-Fi on buses is slightly important.

Quadrant Analysis: Levels of agreement can be mapped on a chart with importance such that satisfaction is graphically measured against how important an issue is in four cells as follows:

▪ The upper -right quadrant represents features that display both high satisfaction and high importance—above the median ratings for importance and satisfaction for all characteristics .

Characteristics in this quadrant are ones with high levels of satisfaction and high levels of importance. These characteristics, therefore, are the core characteristics that make the FAX system a highly valued service.
▪ The lower -right quadrant represents features that display high satisfaction but have low er importance relative to the median. These characteristics might be ones that are over-provided and could be reduced somewhat in reallocating resources to other quadrants —especially the upper quadrant.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Very Important, 41%
Important, 15%
Slightly Important,
17%
Slightly
Unimportant, 7%
Unimportant, 10%
Very Unimportant,
10%
Chart 15
Importance of WiFi on Buses

35 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
▪ The lower-left quadrant represents features that have both less satisfaction and less importance.

Because these features are of relatively l ow importance, efforts to improve these characteristics will have a relatively minor impact on overall satisfaction. ▪ The upper-left quadrant represents features that provide less satisfaction but are of high importance.

The upper-left quadrant is critically important because it contains those system characteristics that are important to employees but are not adequately provided. It is these characteristics that can increase satisfaction to the greatest extent.

Chart 1 6 is a satisfaction/importanc e quadrant analysis for the data provided in t he 20 22 FAX Bus Satisfaction Survey. In the upper right quadrant, three features are plotted: drivers’ helpfulness, drivers’ courtesy, and safety precautions during COVID . These are the core characteristics that lead to the very high degree of satisfaction with FAX service that has been evidenced in this report. In the 2018 and 2014 surveys, drivers’ courtesy was among the core characteristics as were safety on-board the buses and drivers’ driving skills. These latter two still rank high in satisfaction but they are less important than they were in previous years and have fallen to the less important lower -right quadrant. On the other hand, drivers’ helpfulness has moved into the core c haracteristic category in 2022 along with the new category about safety during COVID.

The upper left quadrant shows seven characteristics that would provide an important improvement to overall satisfaction: on-time performance, frequency of buses, time it takes to complete trip, safety on-board buses, safety at bus stops, cleanliness inside buses, and bus hours of operations on weekends. Customers regard these features as highly important but have not been p rovided to them with a s high a degree of satisfaction as some of the other characteristics of FAX bus service. Five of these features appeared in the upper left quadrant in the 2018 quadrant analysis--on-time performance, frequency of buses, time it takes to complete trip, safety at bus stops, and bus hours of operations on weekends. Cleanliness inside the buses was marginally close to the upper-left in 2018, but safety on-board moved from the upper-right to the upper left. This, however, is not as disturbing as it may sound because it was borderline upper right in 2018 and has moved very slightly across the vertical satisfaction dividing line, indicating its relative position vis -à- vis other characteristics has declined as other characteristics have impro ved despite its satisfaction remaining at 2.0.

36 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

2.1, 41%

2.2, 17%

2.2, 9%

2.0, 7%2.6, 7% 1.9, 7%2.2, 7%2.3, 7% 1.9, 7%

1.9, 6%

2.0, 5%

2.1, 4%

1.9, 4% 1.7, 4%1.8, 4%

1.8, 3%1.9, 3%

1.9, 2%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%

11.21.41.61.822.22.42.62.8
Chart 16
Satisfaction/Importance Quadrants
More Satisfaction
Greater Importance
On-Time Performance
Frequency of Buses
Time to Complete Trip
Weekend Hours
Weekday Hours
Cleanliness Inside Buses
Drivers' Courtesy
Safety On-Board Buses
Drivers' Driving Skills
Safety at Bus Stops
Cleanliness of Bus Stops
Value
Comfort
Drivers' Helpfulness &
Stops Close to Home
Drivers' Safety Awareness
& Stops Close to Destination
Availability of Route and Schedule Information
Safety Precautions--COVID

2.5, 4%
Disability Access &
Quality of Announcements

37 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
FAX Report Card
In the 2011, 2014, and 2018 customer satisfaction reports for FAX, letter grades for FAX performance on the various service characteristics were assigned. These reports assigned grades of A, B, C, D or F (including plus and minus distinctions) based upon t he mean satisfaction ratings provided for each characteristic. The grading scale used in the previous reports as well as the current report is depicted in Table 5 below. Table 6 shows the mean ratings and grades for 2022, 2018, 2014, and 2011.

What emerges from Table 6 is evidence that the FAX system has been a consistent success. There is considerable satisfaction with the FAX bus system and this high level of satisfaction is consistent with the results of the 2018 survey. The grades, themselves, remain as they were in 2018; however, improvement within each grade level is found for almost all characteristics

Furthermore, the level of satisfaction has markedly improved from 2014 and 2011. Every characteristic that was graded improved from 2014 by at least one third of a grade.

Weekend operating hours, for example, have shown
enormous improvement from 2011, as has the value of the service provided for the price paid.6

Moreover, many of the same letter grades that were
attributed to a specific service characteristic in 2022 were also attributed to that characteristic in 2018. However , in several instances, the numerical score of that grade was higher in 2022 than in 2018. For example, in both 2022 and 2018, driver’s helpfulness received an A - but in 2022, the numerical score is 1.86 and in 2018, the numerical score was 1.90.

It is also notable that the three new service features that were evaluated in 2022 are well received by the FAX customers. Specifically, accessibility for people with a disability, audio/visual announcement quality on bus, and FAX safety during Covid each received an A-.

6 During the months of March 2021 through September 2021, FAX implemented free bus fares and then decreased the base fare from $1.25 to $1.00 and the reduced fare from 60 cents to 50 cents.

Table 5
FAX Performance Letter Grading Scale
(Based on 1-6 ratings, where 1 = Very
Satisfied and 6 = Very Dissatisfied)

1.00 to 1.33 A+

1.34 to 1.67 A

1.68 to 1.99 A-

2.00 to 2.33 B+

2.34 to 2.67 B

2.68 to 2.99 B-

3.00 to 3.33 C+

3.34 to 3.67 C

3.68 to 3.99 C-

4.00 to 4.33 D+

4.34 to 4.67 D

4.68 to 4.99 D-

5.00 to 5.33 D-/F

5.34 to 6.00 F

38 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Table 6
FAX Customer Satisfaction Report Card and Mean Satisfaction Ratings (Years 2022, 2018, 2014, and 2011)
Service Characteristic 2022 2018 2014 2011
Grade Mean Grade Mean Grade Mean Grade Mean
Overall Service
Provided by FAX Buses A- 1.88 A- 1.89 B+ 2.30 B+ 2.12

Value for Price Paid A- 1.71 A- 1.95 B 2.38 B- 2.70
Drivers' Driving Skills A- 1.77 A- 1.84 B+ 2.14 B+ 2.09 Drivers' Safety
Awareness A- 1.80 A- 1.82 B+ 2.17 B+ 2.06
Accessibility for People
with a Disability A- 1.81
Audio/Visual
Announcement Quality
on Bus
A- 1.85
Drivers' Helpfulness A- 1.86 A- 1.90 B+ 2.17 B+ 2.17
FAX Safety During
COVID A- 1.88
Drivers' Courtesy A- 1.89 A- 1.98 B 2.44 B+ 2.26
Overall Comfort of Bus
Rides A- 1.91 A- 1.99 B 2.42 B+ 2.26
Closeness of Bus Stops
to Destination A- 1.93 A- 1.97 B+ 2.21 B+ 2.28
Closeness of Bus Stops
to Home A- 1.94 A- 1.99 B+ 2.20 B+ 2.30
Availability of
Route/Schedule Info B+ 2.00 B+ 2.07 B 2.47 B 2.64
Safety On-Board
Buses* B+ 2.03 B+ 2.04 B 2.35 A 1.67
Hours of Operation--
Weekdays B+ 2.05 B+ 2.13 B 2.67 B- 2.93
On-Time Performance B+ 2.14 B+ 2.33 B- 2.71 B- 2.71
Time to Complete Trip B+ 2.21 B+ 2.27 B- 2.70 B- 2.95
Safety at Bus
Stops/Stations* B+ 2.22 B+ 2.24 B 2.54 B+ 2.05
Frequency of Buses B+ 2.24 B+ 2.29 B- 2.83 B- 2.83
Cleanliness Inside
Buses B+ 2.25 B 2.37 B- 2.89 B 2.57
Cleanliness of Bus
Stops/Stations B 2.46 B 2.45 B- 2.85 B- 2.80
Hours of Operation--
Weekends B 2.61 B 2.64 C+ 3.30 D+ 4.00
* In 2011, safety questions were asked in a different section of the questionnaire and were on a 4-point scale. The means and percentages have been adjusted but readers are cautioned not to draw significant comparisons based upon these differences between 2018 and 2014 data versus 2011 data.

39 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Availability of Information and Communication

Chart 17 reports how customers prefer to obtain information about routes, schedules, and fares . In 2022, the traditional preference for non-electronic materials has substantially declined from the preferences for such material in 2018, 2014, and 2011. More specifically, the preference for electronic communication systems such as the use of rider alerts, the FAX website, and M yFAXBus app has markedly increased in 2022 (55 percent). In 2018, 39 percent preferred such communication technology and in 2014 and 2011, the percentages were 25 percent and 6 percent respectively. The preference for social media as a technology for communication has doubled since the 2018 survey.

The following subgroup tends to favor audio announcements on buses to obtain information from FAX:
• Customers who se dominant language is Spanish (38.1 percent) versus those whose dominant language is English (18.0 percent).

The following subgroups tend to favor the MyFAXBus app to obtain information from FAX.

• Customers who have limited English proficiency (21.2 percent) as opposed to those who are proficient in English (10.1 percent).
• Customers who se dominant language is English (14.0 percent) versus those whose dominant language is Spanish (4.8 percent).

The following subgroups tend to favor social media to obtain information from FAX:

• Customers who se dominant language is English (29.4 percent) versus those whose dominant language is Spanish (19.0 percent).
• Customers who do not lack English proficiency (29.6 percent) as opposed to those who have limited proficiency in English (21.2 percent).
• Younger customers (under 55 years of age = 33.5 percent) versus older customers (over 55 = 14.6 percent).

The following subgroups tend to favor the use of flyers on buses to obtain information from FAX:

• Older customers (55 and over = 13.9 percent) versus younger customers (under 55 = 6.7 percent). • Customers who have limited English proficiency (24.7 percent) as opposed to those who are proficient in English (15.5 percent).
• Customers who make a large number of trips per week (13 or more trips per week (29.5 percent) versus those who make fewer trips per week (less than 5 trips per week (14.5 percent), 5 to 8 trips per week (16.1 percent), and 9 to 12 trips per week (13.9 percent).

40 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
55%
24%
22%
19% 19%
5% 4% 4%
39%
22%
11%
33%
21% 20%
4%
25%
35%
47%
17%
26%
4%
6%
53%
62%
2%
30%
4%
Chart 17
Preferred Mode of Communication for
Route, Schedule and Fare Information
(Respondents could provide two answers; therefore percentages sum to in excess of 100%.In prior years, respondents could supply as many answers as they wished. Prior years h
2022 2018 2014 2011
Other category mostly blank
or non-responsive
Cell/Text was offered as a category
in prior years, but was extracted
from "other, please specify" in 2022.

In 2022. the distribution
within this combined category
of Alerts, the Website and the
Bus App was:

Rider Alerts = 24%
FAX Website = 16%
MyFAXBusApp = 15%
In 2018, the distribution was:

FAX Website = 21%
MyFAXBusApp = 18%
In 2014, the distribution was:

FAX Website = 25%
In 2011, the distribution was:

FAX Website = 6%

41 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

The following subgroups tend to favor the FAX Newsletter/email to obtain information from FAX:

• Customers who have more education or training --vocational school training (25.3 percent), college graduates (22.1 percent), and those with post graduate education (18.4 percent) as opposed to those with lesser education (less than 8 th grade (6.5 percent), some high school (9.7 percent), and high school graduates (12.7 percent)).
• Customers who do not lack English proficiency (18.7 percent) as opposed to those who have limited proficiency in English (6.5 percent).

The following subgroup tends to favor the FAX website to obtain information from FAX:

• Younger respondents (under 55 years of age = 13.9 percent) versus older respondents (55 and over = 6.7 percent).

The following subgroup tends to favor rider alerts to obtain information from FAX:

• Blacks/African Americans (32.7 percent) and Asians (32.9 percent) versus Hispanics (23.3 percent) and Whites (21.3 percent).

Chart 18 shows that nearly 7 in 10 (69 percent) of FAX customers use mobile apps to help plan their bus trips. Among those who use mobile apps for bus trip planning, Google Transit (50 percent) and MYFAX BUS (49 percent) are by far the most popular apps (Chart 19).

Yes , 69%
No, 31%
Chart 18
Use Any Mobile App(s)?

42 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Other,
11%
Moovit,
11%
MyFAX Bus, 49% Google Transit,
50%
Chart 19
Which Apps Used?
Respondents could choose up to 4 responses; therefore
percentages add up to over 100%
(among 69% who use mobile apps to plan trips)
Other category
includes 4% who
answered that
they use some
form of map,
including
Google Maps

43 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

APPENDIX

Questionnaires (English and Spanish) 44
Frequencies and Open-Ended Responses 55

44 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
FAX 2022 PASSENGER SATISFACTION
SURVEY—ON-BOARD

Please fill out this short questionnaire to provide
important information to FAX about your bus service.

Return the completed survey to the surveyor who
handed you the survey or mail it back at our cost or
drop it off at Manchester Transit Center (MTC) by
February 28, 2022.

REGISTER TO BE ONE OF FIVE TO WIN $100

BY FULLY COMPLETING THIS SURVEY, RETURNING IT
BY FEBRUARY 28, 2022 AND INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING
CONTACT INFORMATION.

(YOUR ANSWERS WILL STILL COUNT EVEN IF YOU CHOOSE NOT
TO SUPPLY THIS INFORMATION.)
NAME:_________________________________________

ADDRESS:_______________________________________

CITY:_____________________STATE_____ZIP__________

HOME PHONE OR CELL:____________________________

E-MAIL:_________________________________________

TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS
Q1. What is the bus route number that you are on? ________ (BUS ROUTE) Q2. How many one-way trips on FAX do you take in a typical week? (If you take a round trip, that would be counted as two trips) __________ (NUMBER OF WEEKLY TRIPS)

Q3a-b. What is the purpose of your typical FAX bus trip? (CHECK ONLY ONE)

1. ___ College 5. ____Errands/Personal

2. ____High/Middle/Elementary School 6. ____Recreational/Social

3. ____Work/Business 7. ____Medical/Dental

4. ____Shopping 8. ____Other, please specify _____________ Q4. How long have you been riding FAX buses, in terms of months or years? ___years ___months (write number of years and/or months)

45 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Q5. If FAX were to introduce an electronic fare payment system, such as a reusable smart card or a mobile ticketing app, would you use it?

1.____Yes 2. ___ No
Q6. Do you use any mobile apps to help you plan your bus trips?

1.____Yes 2. ___ No
Q6a-e. (ANSWER IF Q6 = YES), Which app(s) do you use to plan your trips? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)

1. ____ MyFAXBus 3. ____Moovit

2. ____ Google Transit 4. ____ Other (Please specify) _____________________

Q7a-c. What is the best way for FAX to communicate with you? (CHECK TOP TWO)

1. _____Rider Alerts 6._____MyFAXBusApp

2. _____FAX Web site 7._____Newspaper Ads

3. _____FAX Newsletter / E-mail 8._____Social Media (Twitter, Instagram, Facebook)

4. _____Flyers on Buses 9._____Other (Please Specify)

5. _____Audio Announcements on Buses ________________________________

Q8. Do you have access to a car or other vehicle to make the same kinds of trips that you make by FAX?

1.____Yes 2. ___ No [IF NO, SKIP Q8a AND GO TO Q9)

Q8a. (ANSWER IF Q8 = YES) Why do you ride FAX instead of using that car or other vehicle for your trips? ____________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

46 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Q9. SATISFACTION: Please indicate your satisfaction or dissatisfaction with each of the FAX bus features listed below by placing a check mark in a box for each feature.

Bus Feature

RANK YOUR SATISFACTION WITH EACH BUS FEATURE ON A
SCALE OF 1-to-6

CHECK ONLY ONE COLUMN FOR EACH BUS FEATURE
1 = Very
Satisfied 2 = Satisfied 3 = Slightly
Satisfied
4 = Slightly
Dissatisfied
5 =
Dissatisfied
6 = Very
Dissatisfied

1. On-time performance

2. Frequency of buses

3. Time it takes to complete trip

4. Cleanliness inside buses

5. FAX safety precautions during COVID (for
example, masking/sanitation protocols)

6. Cleanliness of bus stops and transfer stations

7. Personal safety on board FAX buses

8. Personal safety at bus stops and transfer stations

9. Typical FAX bus drivers’ courtesy

10. Typical FAX bus drivers’ helpfulness

11. Typical FAX bus drivers’ driving skills

12. Typical FAX bus drivers’ safety awareness

13. Overall comfort of bus rides

14. Availability of route/ schedule information

15. Bus hours of operation on weekdays

16. Bus hours of operation on weekends

17. Closeness of bus stops to home

18. Closeness of bus stops to destination

19. Accessibility for people with disabilities on FAX
buses

20. Quality of audio and visual announcements on
FAX buses

21. Value provided by FAX for the price paid

22. Overall service provided by FAX

Q9a. Please write the number of the bus service feature listed in Q9 that you consider to be MOST IMPORTANT to you #________. Please include only features “1” through “21” above in your response.

Q9b. Please write the number of the bus service feature listed in Q 9 that you consider to be SECOND MOST IMPORTANT #________. Please include only features “1” through “21” above in your response.

Q10. How important is it to you to have WiFi on the bus? (CHECK ONE BOX)

1 = Very Important 2 = Important 3 = Slightly
Important
4 = Slightly
Unimportant 5 = Unimportant 6 = Very Unimportant

47 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

DEMOGRAPHICS

MILITARY / VETERAN STATUS. Are you active-duty U.S. Military or a U.S. Veteran?

1. ____ Yes

2. ____ No

WORK. What is your work status?

1. ____Employed Full-Time

2. ____Employed Part-Time

3. ____Self-Employed

4. ____Student and Employed

5. ____Student and Not Employed

6. ____Homemaker

7. ____Retired

8. ____Unemployed

9. ____Disabled and Unable to Work

EDUC. What is the last grade in school you have completed?

1. ____Less than 8th Grade Education

2. ____Some High School

3. ____High School Graduate

4. ____Vocational/Technical School

5. ____College Graduate

6. ____Post-Graduate Education

ETHNICITY a-d. Which of the following most closely
describes your ethnic background? (CHECK ONLY ONE)

1. ____Hispanic

2. ____White/Caucasian

3. ____African American/Black

4. ____Asian/Southeast Asian
(please specify national origin or Asian ethnic
group__________________)

5. ____American Indian

6. ____Pacific Islander

7. ____Middle Easterner

8. ____Mixed Ethnicities, please describe
____________________________

9. ____Other, please specify
___________________________

HOUSEHOLD SIZE. Including yourself, how many people live in your household? ________

GENDER.

1. ____Male 3.____Other

AGE. Which of the following age categories best describes your current age?

1. ____Under 18 years old

2. ____18 to 34 years old

3. ____35 to 54 years old

4. ____55 to 74 years old

5. ____75 years old or more

INCOME. Which of the following categories best describes your total household income in 2021, before
taxes?

1. ____Less than $10,000 per year

2. ____$10,000 to $19,999 per year

3. ____$20,000 to $29,999 per year

4. ____$30,000 to $39,999 per year

5. ____$40,000 to $49,999 per year

6. ____$50,000 to $74,999 per year

7. ____ $75,000 to $99,999 per year

8. ____ $100,000 or more per year

9. ____ Do not know

48 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

LEP: Do you consider yourself to be limited in the English language?

1.______Yes 2______No 3.______ Do Not Know
LANGUAGE a-b. What is the primary language spoken in your home?

1. ____English

2. ____Spanish or Spanish Creole

3. ____Hmong

4. ____Punjabi

5. ____Other Indic (Indo-Aryan) languages

6. ____Laotian

7. ____Mon-Khmer, Cambodian

8. ____Chinese

9. ____Arabic

10. ____Vietnamese

11. ____Armenian

12. ____Tagalog

13. ____Other, please specify ___________________
On behalf of FAX and Rea & Parker Research, thank you for your time and survey participation. If you have any comments or questions for FAX, please e-mail them to [email protected].

Please return the completed form to the surveyor. You can also fold, seal, and mail it back at our cost, or you can drop it off at the Manchester Transit Center by February 28, 2022

49 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
ENCUESTA DE SATISFACCIÓN DE CLIENTES
DEL SISTEMA DE TRANSPORTE FAX 2022
– PARADA DE AUTOBÚS

Por favor complete este breve cuestionario para proporcionar información importante a Fresno Area Express (FAX) sobre su servicio de autobús. Devuelva la encuesta completa al inspector que le entregó la encuesta o envíela por correo por nuestra cuenta o déjela en Manchester Transit Center (MTC) antes del 28 de febrero de 2022.

REGÍSTRESE PARA SER UNO DE CINCO
GANADORES DE $100 AL COMPLETAR
TOTALMENTE ESTA ENCUESTA, DEVOLVIÉNDOLO
A PARTIR DEL 28 DE FEBRERO DE 2022, E
INCLUYENDO LA SIGUIENTE INFORMACIÓN DE
CONTACTO.
(SUS RESPUESTAS AÚN CONTARÁN INCLUSO SI
ELIGE NO SUMINISTRAR ESTA INFORMACIÓN).

NOMBRE___________________________________________

DIRECCIÓN__________________________________________

CIUDAD________________________EDO___CÓDIGO_______

TELÉFONO CASA O CELULAR____________________________

CORREO ELEC. ______________________________________
CARACTERÍSTICAS DEL VIAJE
P1. ¿ Cuál es el número de ruta de autobús que está esperando o que acaba de completar? ________ (indique el número de la ruta del autobús)

P2. ¿Cuántos viajes en una sola dirección toma usted por FAX en una semana típica? (Si usted hace viaje de ida y vuelta, cuenta como dos viajes) __________ (indique el número de viajes semenales)

P3a-b. ¿Cúal es el propósito de un viaje típico por autobús FAX? (ESCOJA SOLAMENTE UNA RESPUESTA)

1. ____Universidad/Universidad comunitaria

2. ____Escuela preparatoria/secundaria/primaria

3. ____Trabajo/Negocios

4. ____Compras

5. ____Mandados/Personal

6. ____Diversión/Social

7. ____Citas Médicas/Dentales

8. ____Otro, favor de especificar __________________________

P4. ¿Cuánto tiempo lleva viajando por FAX, en términos de meses o años? ___años ___meses (escriba número de años y/o meses)

P5. Si FAX fuera a implementar un sistema de pago electrónico para tarifas, como una tarjeta inteligente reutilizable o una aplicación móvil de emisión de boletos, ¿lo usaría?

1. _________ Sí 2. _________ No

P6. ¿Utiliza alguna aplicación móvil que le ayude a planificar sus viajes por autobús?

1. _________ Sí 2. _________ No

P6a-e. (RESPONDA si contestó “sí” a P6), ¿Cuáles aplicaciones utiliza para planificar sus viajes? (INDIQUE TODOS LOS QUE CORRESPONDAN)

1.____ MyFAXBus 3. ____Moovit

2. ____ Google Transit 4. ____ Otro (favor de especificar) _______________

50 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
P7a-c. ¿Cuál es la mejor manera de que FAX se comunique con usted? (INDIQUE DOS)

1. _____ Alertas de pasajeros por móvil 6._____ MyFAXBusApp (aplicación móvil)

2. _____ Sitio web de FAX 7._____ Anuncios en los periódicos

3. _____ Boletin de FAX/ correo elec. 8._____ Redes sociales (Twitter, Instagram, Facebook)

4. _____ Volantes en autobuses 9._____ Otro (favor de especificar)

5. _____ Anuncios de audio en autobuses ________________________________

P8. ¿Tiene acceso a un automóvil u otro vehículo para realizar el mismo tipo de viajes que realiza por FAX?

1.____Yes 2. ___ No [SI INDICA “NO,” SIGA A LA P9) P8a. (RESPONDA SI P8 = “SÍ”) ¿Por qué usa FAX en lugar de usar ese automóvil u otro vehículo para sus viajes? ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

P9. SATISFACCIÓN: Por favor indique su satisfacción o disgusto con cada una de las características a continuación de los autobuses de FAX que se enumeran, colocando una palomita en la columna correspondiente para cada característica.

Característica del Autobús
CALIFIQUE SU SATISFACCIÓN CON CADA CARACTERÍSTICA
DEL AUTOBÚS EN UNA ESCALA DE 1 A 6

MARQUE SOLAMENTE UNA COLUMNA PARA CADA
CARACTERÍSTICA
1 = Muy
satisfecha/o
2 = Satis-
fecha/o
3 =
Ligera-
mente
satis-
fecha/o
4 =
Ligera-
mente
insatis-
fecha/o
5 =
Insatis-
fecha/o
6 = Muy
insatis-
fecha/o

1. La puntualidad de su ruta

2. Frecuencia de los autobuses

3. Tiempo que toma realizar el viaje

4. Limpieza dentro de los autobuses

5. Precauciones de seguridad por FAX durante
COVID (por ejemplo, protocolos de
enmascaramiento/desinfección)

6. Limpieza de las paradas de autobús y las
estaciones de transferencia

7. Seguridad personal a bordo de los autobuses FAX

8. Seguridad personal en las paradas de autobús y
las estaciones de transferencia

9. Cortesía típica de los conductores de autobuses de
FAX

10. Amabilidad típica de los conductores de autobuses
de FAX

11. Habilidades de conducción típicas de los
conductores de autobuses de FAX

12. Concienciación sobre la seguridad típica de los
conductores de autobuses de FAX

13. Comodidad general de los viajes en autobús

14. Disponibilidad de información de ruta / horario

15. Horas de operación de los autobuses durante la
semana laboral (lunes a viernes)

16. Horas de operación de los autobuses los fines de
semana (sab. y dom.)

17. Cercanía de las paradas de autobús a casa

18. Cercanía de las paradas de autobús al destino

19. Accesibilidad para personas con discapacidad en
los autobuses FAX

51 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

20. Calidad de los anuncios sonoros y visuales en los
buses de FAX

21. Valor proporcionado por FAX por el precio pagado

22. Servicio total proporcionado por FAX

P9a. Por favor escriba el número de la característica del servicio de autobús de la P9, que considere la más importante para usted:
_________. Por favor incluya únicamente las características “1” al “21”, especificadas arriba, en su respuesta.

P9b. Por favor escriba el número de la característica del servicio de autobús de la P9, que considere la segunda más importante para usted: ____________. Por favor incluya únicamente las características “1” al “21”, especificadas arriba, en su respuesta.

P10. ¿Qué importancia tiene para usted tener WiFi en el autobús? (MARQUE UNA CASILLA)

1 = Muy importante 2 = Importante 3 = Ligeramente
importante
4 = Ligeramente sin
importancia
5 = Sin mucha
importancia
6 = Sin importancia
alguna

DATOS DEMOGRÁFICOS

ESTADO MILITAR / VETERANO. ¿Es militar de los EE. UU. en servicio activo o es un veterano de los EE. UU.?

1. Sí ___________

2. No ___________

TRABAJO. ¿Cuál es su condición laboral?

1. ____Empleada/o de tiempo completo

2. ____Empleada/o tiempo parcial

3. ____Empleada/o independiente

4. ____Estudiante y empleada/o

5. ____Estudiante no empleada/o

6. ____Ama/o de casa

7. ____ Jubilada/o

8. ____Desempleada/o

9. ____Discapacitada/o, no puede trabajar

EDUC. ¿Hasta que nivel ha estudiado?

1. ____Menos del 2o de secundaria (8vo grado/año de
educación)

2. ____Unos años de preparatoria (high school)

3. ____Completó la preparatoria

4. ____Escuela vocacional/técnica

5. ____Graduada/o de la universidad

6. ____Posgraduado

ORIGEN ÉTNICO. ¿Cuál de los siguientes grupos describe con mayor precisión su origen étnico? (MARQUE SOLO UNO)

1. ____hispano/latino

2. ____blanco/caucásico

3. ____afroamericano/negro

4. ____asiático/asiático del sureste
(Por favor especifique origen nacional o grupo
étnico asiático __________________)

5. ____indígena de los EE.UU.

6. ____isleño del pacífico

7. ____del Medio Oriente

8. ____etnias mixtas, por favor describa:
__________________________________________

9. ____otro, favor de especificar:
__________________________________________

TAMAÑO DE HOGAR. Incluyéndose a usted mismo, ¿cuántas
personas viven en su hogar? ___________________

SEXO. 1_____Hombre 2. _____Mujer 3. _____Otro

LEP: ¿Se considera limitado en el inglés?

1. ______Sí 2. ______No 3. ______ No sé

EDAD. ¿Cuál de las siguientes categorías describe su edad actual con mayor precisión?

1. _Menor de 18 años de edad

2. _18 a 34 años de edad

3. ____35 a 54 años de edad

4. ____55 a 74 años de edad

5. ____75 años o más de edad

INGRESOS. ¿Cuál de las siguientes categorías describe mejor los ingresos totales de su hogar en el 2021, antes de impuestos?

1. ____Menos de $10,000 por año

2. ___$10,000 a $19,999 por año

3. ____$20,000 a $29,999 por año

4. ____$30,000 a $39,999 por año

5. ____$40,000 a $49,999 por año

6. ____$50,000 a $74,999 por año

7. ____$75,000 a $99,000 por año

8. ____$100,000 o más por año

9. ____No lo sé

52 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
IDIOMA a-b. ¿Cuál es el idioma principal de su hogar?

1. ____inglés

2. ____español o español criollo

3. ____hmong

4. ____punjabi

5. ____otros idiomas índicos (indoarias)

6. ____laosiano/lao

7. ____mon-jemer, camboyano

8. ____chino

9. ____árabe

10. ____vietnamita

11. ____armenio

12. ____tagalo

13. ____otro, favor de especificar ____________________

Por parte de FAX y de Rea & Parker Research, agradecemos su tiempo y participación en esta encuesta. Si tiene algún comentario o pregunta para FAX, envíelo por correo electrónico a [email protected]
Por favor devuelva este formulario completo al encuestador/la encuestadora. También lo puede doblar, sellar y enviar por correo por nuestra cuenta o puede entregarlo en el Centro de Tránsito de Manchester a más tardar el 28 de febrero de 2022.

55 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

FREQUENCIES AND OPEN-ENDED RESPONSES

Satisfaction Overall Service
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 336 38.4 43.8 43.8
Satisfied 282 32.2 36.7 80.5
Slightly Satisfied 100 11.4 13.0 93.5
Slightly Dissatisfied 22 2.5 2.9 96.4
Dissatisfied 14 1.6 1.8 98.2
Very Dissatisfied 14 1.6 1.8 100.0
Total 768 87.7 100.0
Missing System 108 12.3
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction On-Time Performance
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 290 33.1 36.6 36.6
Satisfied 273 31.2 34.5 71.1
Slightly Satisfied 130 14.8 16.4 87.5
Slightly Dissatisfied 46 5.3 5.8 93.3
Dissatisfied 33 3.8 4.2 97.5
Very Dissatisfied 20 2.3 2.5 100.0
Total 792 90.4 100.0
Missing System 84 9.6
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Frequency Of Buses
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 269 30.7 34.4 34.4
Satisfied 265 30.3 33.9 68.3
Slightly Satisfied 132 15.1 16.9 85.2
Slightly Dissatisfied 51 5.8 6.5 91.7
Dissatisfied 38 4.3 4.9 96.5
Very Dissatisfied 27 3.1 3.5 100.0
Total 782 89.3 100.0
Missing System 94 10.7
Total 876 100.0

56 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction Time to Complete Trip
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 257 29.3 33.2 33.2
Satisfied 278 31.7 36.0 69.2
Slightly Satisfied 130 14.8 16.8 86.0
Slightly Dissatisfied 62 7.1 8.0 94.0
Dissatisfied 22 2.5 2.8 96.9
Very Dissatisfied 24 2.7 3.1 100.0
Total 773 88.2 100.0
Missing System 103 11.8
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Cleanliness Inside Buses
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 235 26.8 31.3 31.3
Satisfied 276 31.5 36.7 68.0
Slightly Satisfied 135 15.4 18.0 85.9
Slightly Dissatisfied 55 6.3 7.3 93.2
Dissatisfied 28 3.2 3.7 96.9
Very Dissatisfied 23 2.6 3.1 100.0
Total 752 85.8 100.0
Missing System 124 14.2
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction FAX Safety During COVID
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 360 41.1 46.6 46.6
Satisfied 258 29.5 33.4 79.9
Slightly Satisfied 87 9.9 11.3 91.2
Slightly Dissatisfied 37 4.2 4.8 96.0
Dissatisfied 16 1.8 2.1 98.1
Very Dissatisfied 15 1.7 1.9 100.0
Total 773 88.2 100.0
Missing System 103 11.8
Total 876 100.0

57 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction Cleanliness Bus Stops
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 234 26.7 30.1 30.1
Satisfied 232 26.5 29.8 59.9
Slightly Satisfied 151 17.2 19.4 79.3
Slightly Dissatisfied 76 8.7 9.8 89.1
Dissatisfied 55 6.3 7.1 96.1
Very Dissatisfied 30 3.4 3.9 100.0
Total 778 88.8 100.0
Missing System 98 11.2
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Personal Safety On-Board
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 291 33.2 37.7 37.7
Satisfied 285 32.5 36.9 74.6
Slightly Satisfied 123 14.0 15.9 90.5
Slightly Dissatisfied 38 4.3 4.9 95.5
Dissatisfied 25 2.9 3.2 98.7
Very Dissatisfied 10 1.1 1.3 100.0
Total 772 88.1 100.0
Missing System 104 11.9
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Personal Safety at Bus Stops
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 254 29.0 33.2 33.2
Satisfied 261 29.8 34.1 67.2
Slightly Satisfied 147 16.8 19.2 86.4
Slightly Dissatisfied 51 5.8 6.7 93.1
Dissatisfied 38 4.3 5.0 98.0
Very Dissatisfied 15 1.7 2.0 100.0
Total 766 87.4 100.0
Missing System 110 12.6
Total 876 100.0

58 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction Driver Courtesy
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 337 38.5 43.5 43.5
Satisfied 283 32.3 36.6 80.1
Slightly Satisfied 95 10.8 12.3 92.4
Slightly Dissatisfied 35 4.0 4.5 96.9
Dissatisfied 10 1.1 1.3 98.2
Very Dissatisfied 14 1.6 1.8 100.0
Total 774 88.4 100.0
Missing System 102 11.6
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Driver Helpfulness
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 352 40.2 45.7 45.7
Satisfied 278 31.7 36.1 81.7
Slightly Satisfied 82 9.4 10.6 92.3
Slightly Dissatisfied 32 3.7 4.2 96.5
Dissatisfied 8 .9 1.0 97.5
Very Dissatisfied 19 2.2 2.5 100.0
Total 771 88.0 100.0
Missing System 105 12.0
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Driver Driving Skill
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 367 41.9 48.2 48.2
Satisfied 278 31.7 36.5 84.8
Slightly Satisfied 76 8.7 10.0 94.7
Slightly Dissatisfied 19 2.2 2.5 97.2
Dissatisfied 8 .9 1.1 98.3
Very Dissatisfied 13 1.5 1.7 100.0
Total 761 86.9 100.0
Missing System 115 13.1
Total 876 100.0

59 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction Driver Safety Awareness
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 358 40.9 45.9 45.9
Satisfied 296 33.8 37.9 83.8
Slightly Satisfied 84 9.6 10.8 94.6
Slightly Dissatisfied 24 2.7 3.1 97.7
Dissatisfied 4 .5 .5 98.2
Very Dissatisfied 14 1.6 1.8 100.0
Total 780 89.0 100.0
Missing System 96 11.0
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Overall Comfort of Bus Ride
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 305 34.8 39.2 39.2
Satisfied 321 36.6 41.3 80.5
Slightly Satisfied 101 11.5 13.0 93.4
Slightly Dissatisfied 32 3.7 4.1 97.6
Dissatisfied 6 .7 .8 98.3
Very Dissatisfied 13 1.5 1.7 100.0
Total 778 88.8 100.0
Missing System 98 11.2
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Availability of Route/Schedule Information Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 301 34.4 39.2 39.2
Satisfied 283 32.3 36.8 76.0
Slightly Satisfied 114 13.0 14.8 90.9
Slightly Dissatisfied 40 4.6 5.2 96.1
Dissatisfied 11 1.3 1.4 97.5
Very Dissatisfied 19 2.2 2.5 100.0
Total 768 87.7 100.0
Missing System 108 12.3
Total 876 100.0

60 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction Bus Hours of Operation--Weekdays
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 310 35.4 40.1 40.1
Satisfied 263 30.0 34.0 74.0
Slightly Satisfied 114 13.0 14.7 88.8
Slightly Dissatisfied 46 5.3 5.9 94.7
Dissatisfied 20 2.3 2.6 97.3
Very Dissatisfied 21 2.4 2.7 100.0
Total 774 88.4 100.0
Missing System 102 11.6
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Bus Hours of Operation--Weekends
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 226 25.8 29.5 29.5
Satisfied 221 25.2 28.9 58.4
Slightly Satisfied 119 13.6 15.5 73.9
Slightly Dissatisfied 87 9.9 11.4 85.2
Dissatisfied 52 5.9 6.8 92.0
Very Dissatisfied 61 7.0 8.0 100.0
Total 766 87.4 100.0
Missing System 110 12.6
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Bus Stop Closeness to Home
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 341 38.9 44.2 44.2
Satisfied 265 30.3 34.3 78.5
Slightly Satisfied 95 10.8 12.3 90.8
Slightly Dissatisfied 28 3.2 3.6 94.4
Dissatisfied 25 2.9 3.2 97.7
Very Dissatisfied 18 2.1 2.3 100.0
Total 772 88.1 100.0
Missing System 104 11.9
Total 876 100.0

61 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction Bus Stop Closeness to Destination
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 310 35.4 40.7 40.7
Satisfied 306 34.9 40.2 80.9
Slightly Satisfied 84 9.6 11.0 92.0
Slightly Dissatisfied 25 2.9 3.3 95.3
Dissatisfied 19 2.2 2.5 97.8
Very Dissatisfied 17 1.9 2.2 100.0
Total 761 86.9 100.0
Missing System 115 13.1
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Accessibility for People with Disability
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 344 39.3 45.0 45.0
Satisfied 290 33.1 38.0 83.0
Slightly Satisfied 93 10.6 12.2 95.2
Slightly Dissatisfied 18 2.1 2.4 97.5
Dissatisfied 5 .6 .7 98.2
Very Dissatisfied 14 1.6 1.8 100.0
Total 764 87.2 100.0
Missing System 112 12.8
Total 876 100.0

Satisfaction Audio/Visual Announcement Quality on Bus
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 335 38.2 43.5 43.5
Satisfied 296 33.8 38.4 81.9
Slightly Satisfied 95 10.8 12.3 94.3
Slightly Dissatisfied 23 2.6 3.0 97.3
Dissatisfied 7 .8 .9 98.2
Very Dissatisfied 14 1.6 1.8 100.0
Total 770 87.9 100.0
Missing System 106 12.1
Total 876 100.0

62 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Satisfaction Value for the Price

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Satisfied 406 46.3 52.6 52.6
Satisfied 255 29.1 33.0 85.6
Slightly Satisfied 73 8.3 9.5 95.1
Slightly Dissatisfied 20 2.3 2.6 97.7
Dissatisfied 4 .5 .5 98.2
Very Dissatisfied 14 1.6 1.8 100.0
Total 772 88.1 100.0
Missing System 104 11.9
Total 876 100.0

Zip Code of Residence
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 11743 1 .1 .2 .2
14527 1 .1 .2 .3
15212 1 .1 .2 .5
20817 1 .1 .2 .7
21090 1 .1 .2 .8
22304 1 .1 .2 1.0
30002 1 .1 .2 1.2
33383 1 .1 .2 1.3
34786 1 .1 .2 1.5
60104 1 .1 .2 1.7
73001 1 .1 .2 1.8
74103 1 .1 .2 2.0
75202 1 .1 .2 2.1
80001 1 .1 .2 2.3
85233 1 .1 .2 2.5
90723 1 .1 .2 2.6
93217 1 .1 .2 2.8
93278 1 .1 .2 3.0
93602 1 .1 .2 3.1
93606 2 .2 .3 3.5

63 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Zip Code of Residence
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
93609 1 .1 .2 3.6
93611 2 .2 .3 4.0
93612 10 1.1 1.7 5.6
93618 1 .1 .2 5.8
93625 1 .1 .2 5.9
93637 1 .1 .2 6.1
93638 1 .1 .2 6.3
93640 1 .1 .2 6.4
93646 1 .1 .2 6.6
93650 6 .7 1.0 7.6
93651 1 .1 .2 7.8
93660 1 .1 .2 7.9
93662 2 .2 .3 8.3
93700 2 .2 .3 8.6
93701 22 2.5 3.6 12.2
93702 60 6.8 9.9 22.1
93703 40 4.6 6.6 28.7
93704 32 3.7 5.3 34.0
93705 47 5.4 7.8 41.7
93706 62 7.1 10.2 52.0
93707 3 .3 .5 52.5
93710 26 3.0 4.3 56.8
93711 20 2.3 3.3 60.1
93714 2 .2 .3 60.4
93717 2 .2 .3 60.7
93720 8 .9 1.3 62.0
93721 19 2.2 3.1 65.2
93722 38 4.3 6.3 71.5
93723 3 .3 .5 71.9
93725 17 1.9 2.8 74.8
93726 58 6.6 9.6 84.3
93727 50 5.7 8.3 92.6
93728 31 3.5 5.1 97.7
93729 1 .1 .2 97.9
93735 1 .1 .2 98.0

64 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Zip Code of Residence
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
93740 1 .1 .2 98.2
93744 1 .1 .2 98.3
93745 1 .1 .2 98.5
93779 1 .1 .2 98.7
93781 1 .1 .2 98.8
93790 1 .1 .2 99.0
93794 1 .1 .2 99.2
95118 1 .1 .2 99.3
95121 1 .1 .2 99.5
95652 1 .1 .2 99.7
97236 1 .1 .2 99.8
98001 1 .1 .2 100.0
Total 606 69.2 100.0
Missing System 270 30.8
Total 876 100.0

Time of Day
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 6:00am-6:59am 19 2.2 2.2 2.2
7:00am-7:59am 41 4.7 4.7 6.8
8:00am-8:59am 42 4.8 4.8 11.6
9:00am-9:59am 51 5.8 5.8 17.5
10:00am-10:59am 79 9.0 9.0 26.5
11:00am-11:59am 111 12.7 12.7 39.2
12 noon-12:59pm 97 11.1 11.1 50.2
1:00pm-1:59pm 147 16.8 16.8 67.0
2:00pm-2:59pm 120 13.7 13.7 80.7
3:00pm-3:59pm 97 11.1 11.1 91.8
4:00pm-4:59pm 36 4.1 4.1 95.9
5:00pm-5:59pm 36 4.1 4.1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

65 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Day of Week
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Monday 133 15.2 15.2 15.2
Tuesday 94 10.7 10.7 25.9
Wednesday 181 20.7 20.7 46.6
Thursday 205 23.4 23.4 70.0
Friday 117 13.4 13.4 83.3
Saturday 70 8.0 8.0 91.3
Sunday 76 8.7 8.7 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Language of Survey
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid English 834 95.2 95.2 95.2
Spanish 42 4.8 4.8 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Bus Route
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 268 30.6 30.6 30.6
3 15 1.7 1.7 32.3
9 78 8.9 8.9 41.2
12 15 1.7 1.7 42.9
20 23 2.6 2.6 45.5
22 36 4.1 4.1 49.7
26 44 5.0 5.0 54.7
28 59 6.7 6.7 61.4
32 52 5.9 5.9 67.4
33 13 1.5 1.5 68.8
34 69 7.9 7.9 76.7
35 26 3.0 3.0 79.7
38 92 10.5 10.5 90.2
39 19 2.2 2.2 92.4
41 57 6.5 6.5 98.9
45 9 1.0 1.0 99.9
58 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

66 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Number of One-way Trips per Week
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 6 .7 .7 .7
1 46 5.3 5.7 6.5
2 113 12.9 14.1 20.5
3 53 6.1 6.6 27.1
4 108 12.3 13.4 40.6
5 63 7.2 7.8 48.4
6 66 7.5 8.2 56.7
7 33 3.8 4.1 60.8
8 42 4.8 5.2 66.0
9 5 .6 .6 66.6
10 110 12.6 13.7 80.3
11 2 .2 .2 80.6
12 32 3.7 4.0 84.6
14 34 3.9 4.2 88.8
15 9 1.0 1.1 89.9
16 5 .6 .6 90.5
17 2 .2 .2 90.8
18 5 .6 .6 91.4
20 23 2.6 2.9 94.3
21 1 .1 .1 94.4
24 4 .5 .5 94.9
25 2 .2 .2 95.1
26 1 .1 .1 95.3
28 1 .1 .1 95.4
30 19 2.2 2.4 97.8
35 5 .6 .6 98.4
36 2 .2 .2 98.6
38 1 .1 .1 98.8
40 2 .2 .2 99.0
45 1 .1 .1 99.1
50 6 .7 .7 99.9
60 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 803 91.7 100.0
Missing System 73 8.3
Total 876 100.0

67 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Trips Categorized
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Less than 5 326 37.2 40.6 40.6
5-8 204 23.3 25.4 66.0
9-12 149 17.0 18.6 84.6
13 or more 124 14.2 15.4 100.0
Total 803 91.7 100.0
Missing System 73 8.3
Total 876 100.0

Purpose of Typical FAX Bus Trip
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid College 102 11.6 11.8 11.8
High/Middle/Elementary School 81 9.2 9.4 21.2
Work/Business 274 31.3 31.7 53.0
Shopping 138 15.8 16.0 68.9
Errands/Personal 173 19.7 20.0 89.0
Recreation/Social 19 2.2 2.2 91.2
Medical/Dental 57 6.5 6.6 97.8
Other 19 2.2 2.2 100.0
Total 863 98.5 100.0
Missing System 13 1.5
Total 876 100.0

68 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Other Purpose Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 865 98.7 98.7 98.7
A variety of all the above except
for k-12 education
1 .1 .1 98.9
all 1 .1 .1 99.0
Blue Sky for Veterans & Seniors 1 .1 .1 99.1
church 1 .1 .1 99.2
day programs 2 .2 .2 99.4
housing 1 .1 .1 99.5
Just to ride 1 .1 .1 99.7
need a ride 1 .1 .1 99.8
pass time 1 .1 .1 99.9
Volunteer work 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Years /Months Riding FAX
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid .1 124 14.2 14.2 14.2
.2 7 .8 .8 15.0
.3 12 1.4 1.4 16.3
.3 6 .7 .7 17.0
.4 7 .8 .8 17.8
.5 12 1.4 1.4 19.2
.6 8 .9 .9 20.1
.7 1 .1 .1 20.2
.8 2 .2 .2 20.4
.8 1 .1 .1 20.5
.9 1 .1 .1 20.7

1.0 26 3.0 3.0 23.6

1.1 8 .9 .9 24.5

1.2 10 1.1 1.1 25.7

1.3 3 .3 .3 26.0

1.3 1 .1 .1 26.1

1.4 1 .1 .1 26.3

1.5 5 .6 .6 26.8

1.7 2 .2 .2 27.1

2.0 43 4.9 4.9 32.0

69 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

2.2 3 .3 .3 32.3

2.3 8 .9 .9 33.2

2.3 1 .1 .1 33.3

2.4 3 .3 .3 33.7

2.5 1 .1 .1 33.8

2.8 1 .1 .1 33.9

3.0 37 4.2 4.2 38.1

3.1 2 .2 .2 38.4

3.2 2 .2 .2 38.6

3.3 1 .1 .1 38.7

3.5 7 .8 .8 39.5

3.6 6 .7 .7 40.2

3.7 2 .2 .2 40.4

4.0 28 3.2 3.2 43.6

4.1 1 .1 .1 43.7

4.2 4 .5 .5 44.2

4.3 4 .5 .5 44.6

4.5 2 .2 .2 44.9

4.6 3 .3 .3 45.2

4.8 1 .1 .1 45.3

5.0 43 4.9 4.9 50.2

5.2 4 .5 .5 50.7

5.3 3 .3 .3 51.0

5.3 2 .2 .2 51.3

5.5 2 .2 .2 51.5

5.6 1 .1 .1 51.6

5.7 1 .1 .1 51.7

5.9 3 .3 .3 52.1

6.0 22 2.5 2.5 54.6

6.2 1 .1 .1 54.7

6.3 5 .6 .6 55.3

6.4 1 .1 .1 55.4

6.6 3 .3 .3 55.7

6.7 1 .1 .1 55.8

7.0 15 1.7 1.7 57.5

7.2 2 .2 .2 57.8

7.5 1 .1 .1 57.9

70 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

7.7 1 .1 .1 58.0

8.0 11 1.3 1.3 59.2

8.2 1 .1 .1 59.4

9.0 2 .2 .2 59.6

9.3 1 .1 .1 59.7

9.8 1 .1 .1 59.8

10.0 50 5.7 5.7 65.5

10.1 1 .1 .1 65.6

10.2 8 .9 .9 66.6

10.3 2 .2 .2 66.8

10.4 3 .3 .3 67.1

10.5 2 .2 .2 67.4

10.6 5 .6 .6 67.9

11.0 8 .9 .9 68.8

11.3 1 .1 .1 68.9

12.0 7 .8 .8 69.7

12.5 1 .1 .1 69.9

12.8 2 .2 .2 70.1

13.0 7 .8 .8 70.9

13.2 2 .2 .2 71.1

13.5 2 .2 .2 71.3

14.6 1 .1 .1 71.5

15.0 26 3.0 3.0 74.4

15.1 1 .1 .1 74.5

15.2 3 .3 .3 74.9

15.3 3 .3 .3 75.2

15.4 2 .2 .2 75.5

15.5 3 .3 .3 75.8

15.7 1 .1 .1 75.9

15.8 2 .2 .2 76.1

16.0 1 .1 .1 76.3

16.2 1 .1 .1 76.4

17.0 3 .3 .3 76.7

17.7 1 .1 .1 76.8

18.0 8 .9 .9 77.7

19.0 2 .2 .2 78.0

19.1 1 .1 .1 78.1

71 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

19.5 1 .1 .1 78.2

20.0 44 5.0 5.0 83.2

20.2 4 .5 .5 83.7

20.3 2 .2 .2 83.9

20.4 3 .3 .3 84.2

20.8 1 .1 .1 84.4

20.9 1 .1 .1 84.5

21.0 2 .2 .2 84.7

21.1 1 .1 .1 84.8

21.2 2 .2 .2 85.0

22.0 4 .5 .5 85.5

22.2 2 .2 .2 85.7

23.0 3 .3 .3 86.1

23.3 1 .1 .1 86.2

24.2 1 .1 .1 86.3

24.8 1 .1 .1 86.4

25.0 20 2.3 2.3 88.7

25.1 1 .1 .1 88.8

25.2 2 .2 .2 89.0

25.3 1 .1 .1 89.2

25.7 1 .1 .1 89.3

26.6 2 .2 .2 89.5

27.0 2 .2 .2 89.7

27.5 1 .1 .1 89.8

28.5 2 .2 .2 90.1

28.8 3 .3 .3 90.4

29.2 1 .1 .1 90.5

30.0 22 2.5 2.5 93.0

30.1 1 .1 .1 93.2

30.2 5 .6 .6 93.7

30.5 1 .1 .1 93.8

30.7 1 .1 .1 93.9

31.0 1 .1 .1 94.1

32.0 3 .3 .3 94.4

32.7 1 .1 .1 94.5

34.0 1 .1 .1 94.6

34.5 1 .1 .1 94.7

72 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

35.0 4 .5 .5 95.2

36.0 3 .3 .3 95.5

37.0 2 .2 .2 95.8

39.0 2 .2 .2 96.0

40.0 13 1.5 1.5 97.5

40.2 2 .2 .2 97.7

41.0 3 .3 .3 98.1

41.1 1 .1 .1 98.2

42.1 2 .2 .2 98.4

45.3 1 .1 .1 98.5

46.0 2 .2 .2 98.7

47.0 2 .2 .2 99.0

50.0 1 .1 .1 99.1

51.0 2 .2 .2 99.3

55.0 2 .2 .2 99.5

60.0 3 .3 .3 99.9

63.0 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Tenure categorized
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Less than one year 181 20.7 20.7 20.7
1-to-less than 3 years 116 13.2 13.2 33.9
3-to-less than 5 years 100 11.4 11.4 45.3
5-to-less than 10 years 127 14.5 14.5 59.8
10-to-less than 20 years 352 40.2 40.2 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Years Riding FAX
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 0 181 20.7 20.7 20.7
1 56 6.4 6.4 27.1
2 60 6.8 6.8 33.9
3 57 6.5 6.5 40.4
4 43 4.9 4.9 45.3
5 59 6.7 6.7 52.1

73 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Years Riding FAX
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
6 33 3.8 3.8 55.8
7 19 2.2 2.2 58.0
8 12 1.4 1.4 59.4
9 4 .5 .5 59.8
10 71 8.1 8.1 67.9
11 9 1.0 1.0 68.9
12 10 1.1 1.1 70.1
13 11 1.3 1.3 71.3
14 1 .1 .1 71.5
15 41 4.7 4.7 76.1
16 2 .2 .2 76.4
17 4 .5 .5 76.8
18 8 .9 .9 77.7
19 4 .5 .5 78.2
20 55 6.3 6.3 84.5
21 5 .6 .6 85.0
22 6 .7 .7 85.7
23 4 .5 .5 86.2
24 2 .2 .2 86.4
25 25 2.9 2.9 89.3
26 2 .2 .2 89.5
27 3 .3 .3 89.8
28 5 .6 .6 90.4
29 1 .1 .1 90.5
30 30 3.4 3.4 93.9
31 1 .1 .1 94.1
32 4 .5 .5 94.5
34 2 .2 .2 94.7
35 4 .5 .5 95.2
36 3 .3 .3 95.5
37 2 .2 .2 95.8
39 2 .2 .2 96.0
40 15 1.7 1.7 97.7
41 4 .5 .5 98.2
42 2 .2 .2 98.4

74 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Years Riding FAX
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
45 1 .1 .1 98.5
46 2 .2 .2 98.7
47 2 .2 .2 99.0
50 1 .1 .1 99.1
51 2 .2 .2 99.3
55 2 .2 .2 99.5
60 3 .3 .3 99.9
63 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Months Riding FAX
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 0 481 54.9 54.9 54.9
1 144 16.4 16.4 71.3
2 67 7.6 7.6 79.0
3 42 4.8 4.8 83.8
4 16 1.8 1.8 85.6
5 20 2.3 2.3 87.9
6 44 5.0 5.0 92.9
7 29 3.3 3.3 96.2
8 13 1.5 1.5 97.7
9 6 .7 .7 98.4
10 9 1.0 1.0 99.4
11 5 .6 .6 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Use Electronic Fare Payment
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Yes 680 77.6 80.1 80.1
No 169 19.3 19.9 100.0
Total 849 96.9 100.0
Missing System 27 3.1
Total 876 100.0

75 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Use Mobile Apps
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Yes 590 67.4 69.2 69.2
No 263 30.0 30.8 100.0
Total 853 97.4 100.0
Missing System 23 2.6
Total 876 100.0

Which Mobile App Used
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid MyFAXBus 287 32.8 50.3 50.3
Google Transit 200 22.8 35.0 85.3
Moovit 44 5.0 7.7 93.0
Other 40 4.6 7.0 100.0
Total 571 65.2 100.0
Missing System 305 34.8
Total 876 100.0

Other Mobile App Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 853 97.4 97.4 97.4
bus book 1 .1 .1 97.5
bus stops 1 .1 .1 97.6
downloaded bus schedule 1 .1 .1 97.7
google maps 7 .8 .8 98.5
Google maps 1 .1 .1 98.6
Google Maps 1 .1 .1 98.7
Google Maps. 2 .2 .2 99.0
google/facebook 1 .1 .1 99.1
maps 4 .5 .5 99.5
Maps 2 .2 .2 99.8
schedule 1 .1 .1 99.9
screenshots of FAX route 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

76 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Which Mobile App Used
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Google Transit 95 10.8 68.8 68.8
Moovit 20 2.3 14.5 83.3
Other 23 2.6 16.7 100.0
Total 138 15.8 100.0
Missing System 738 84.2
Total 876 100.0

Other Mobile App Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 865 98.7 98.7 98.7
621.ride 2 .2 .2 99.0
Book schedule 1 .1 .1 99.1
fax maps 1 .1 .1 99.2
google 2 .2 .2 99.4
google maps 1 .1 .1 99.5
Google Maps 1 .1 .1 99.7
look at schedule maps 1 .1 .1 99.8
maps 2 .2 .2 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Which Mobile App Used
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Google Transit 1 .1 25.0 25.0
Moovit 3 .3 75.0 100.0
Total 4 .5 100.0
Missing System 872 99.5
Total 876 100.0
Which Mobile App Used
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Other 2 .2 100.0 100.0
Missing System 874 99.8
Total 876 100.0

Best Way to Communicate
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

77 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Valid Rider Alerts 194 22.1 23.5 23.5
FAX Web Site 102 11.6 12.3 35.8
FAX Newsletter/E-mail 123 14.0 14.9 50.7
Flyers on Buses 141 16.1 17.1 67.8
Audio Announcements on Buses 69 7.9 8.4 76.2
MyFAXBus App 66 7.5 8.0 84.1
Newspaper Ads 16 1.8 1.9 86.1
Social Media 63 7.2 7.6 93.7
Phone/Text 25 2.9 3.0 96.7
Other 27 3.1 3.3 100.0
Total 826 94.3 100.0
Missing System 50 5.7
Total 876 100.0

Other Communication Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 865 98.7 98.7 98.7
bus riders 1 .1 .1 98.9
friendly us drivers 1 .1 .1 99.0
I'm usually homeless, so word of
mouth
2 .2 .2 99.2
in person 1 .1 .1 99.3
Local news 1 .1 .1 99.4
mail 1 .1 .1 99.5
N/A 1 .1 .1 99.7
none 1 .1 .1 99.8
remember this time for 20 years 1 .1 .1 99.9
schedule book 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

78 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Best Way to Communicate
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Rider Alerts 3 .3 .7 .7
FAX Web Site 29 3.3 7.0 7.7
FAX Newsletter/E-mail 34 3.9 8.2 15.8
Flyers on Buses 56 6.4 13.4 29.3
Audio Announcements on Buses 84 9.6 20.1 49.4
MyFAXBus App 56 6.4 13.4 62.8
Newspaper Ads 24 2.7 5.8 68.6
Social Media 115 13.1 27.6 96.2
Phone/Text 7 .8 1.7 97.8
Other 9 1.0 2.2 100.0
Total 417 47.6 100.0
Missing System 459 52.4
Total 876 100.0

Other Communication Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 863 98.5 98.5 98.5
cell phone 2 .2 .2 98.7
Fax book 1 .1 .1 98.9
message 1 .1 .1 99.0
MTC Reps 1 .1 .1 99.1
phone 1 .1 .1 99.2
Phone 1 .1 .1 99.3
phone call 2 .2 .2 99.5
text 3 .3 .3 99.9
us postal 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

79 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Access to Car/Other Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Yes 241 27.5 29.8 29.8
No 569 65.0 70.2 100.0
Total 810 92.5 100.0
Missing System 66 7.5
Total 876 100.0

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 673 76.8 76.8 76.8
better for the environment. 1 .1 .1 76.9
just as efficient as a car. 1 .1 .1 77.1
Porque el auto lo usa mi esposo
para el trabajo
1 .1 .1 77.2
A fun day trip with my young son. 1 .1 .1 77.3
Affordable 2 .2 .2 77.5
age factor + DUI Classes 1 .1 .1 77.6
Avoid parking issue/costs, car not
working/available
2 .2 .2 77.9
Because as a single mom that
goes to college, I had to take
decisions on what bill pay first and
rent being the most important my
car has an expired tag and I'm
saving up to get registration up to
date
1 .1 .1 78.0
Because I came home from work
late at night so there is no FAX
service anymore
1 .1 .1 78.1
Because I don't have my license. 2 .2 .2 78.3
Because my spouse using the car
to go to work so we share the car
1 .1 .1 78.4
Bicycle 1 .1 .1 78.5
boyfriend needs it for work 1 .1 .1 78.7

80 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
But every now and them i get a
ride in a car. i take the FAX bus
most of the time
1 .1 .1 78.8
Car broke 1 .1 .1 78.9
car broke down 1 .1 .1 79.0
car can't function for many miles,
very limited on what to use it for
1 .1 .1 79.1
Car in the shop, or don’t have
enough gas money
1 .1 .1 79.2
car is down 1 .1 .1 79.3
car is not mine. don't always have
someone to take me places
1 .1 .1 79.5
Car needs to be fixed 1 .1 .1 79.6
car not reliable 1 .1 .1 79.7
car repairs 1 .1 .1 79.8
car works for long distance trips
only
1 .1 .1 79.9
carbon footprint. 1 .1 .1 80.0
change of pace 1 .1 .1 80.1
Change of scenery 1 .1 .1 80.3
cheap 1 .1 .1 80.4
cheaper 4 .5 .5 80.8
cheaper than car 1 .1 .1 80.9
Conflict of scheduling 1 .1 .1 81.1
convenience 1 .1 .1 81.2
convenience- low cost 1 .1 .1 81.3
convenient ride courtesy to us
when riders i can get to go to my
destination/arrival time
1 .1 .1 81.4
cost and parking hassle 1 .1 .1 81.5
different schedule from spouse 1 .1 .1 81.6
Don’t have to worry about other
drivers
1 .1 .1 81.7
drivers make it easy 1 .1 .1 81.8
easier 1 .1 .1 82.0
energy conservation 1 .1 .1 82.1

81 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
enjoy other people 1 .1 .1 82.2
enjoy ride the bus 1 .1 .1 82.3
enjoy the ride 1 .1 .1 82.4
environment 2 .2 .2 82.6
environmental reasons 1 .1 .1 82.8
Exercise. 2 .2 .2 83.0
Experience. And to stay grounded 1 .1 .1 83.1
extend bike trips 1 .1 .1 83.2
FAX helps environment, saves on
gas money, keeps people
connected to the community,
enjoy the ride
1 .1 .1 83.3
FAX is less expensive 1 .1 .1 83.4
Fax more convenient 1 .1 .1 83.6
For change 1 .1 .1 83.7
for work 2 .2 .2 83.9
free fares with fresno state ID
card. less co2 emitted/ mile by
bus than personal car
1 .1 .1 84.0
Fun 1 .1 .1 84.1
Gas 1 .1 .1 84.2
gas are to high right now 1 .1 .1 84.4
gas is expensive 1 .1 .1 84.5
Gasoline is expensive 1 .1 .1 84.6
get off different time 1 .1 .1 84.7
Help with climate change and with
local air quality
1 .1 .1 84.8
Helps save gas and reduces
polution
1 .1 .1 84.9
husband drives 1 .1 .1 85.0
Husband usually uses it for work 1 .1 .1 85.2
I am a care giver, to help my
clients
1 .1 .1 85.3

82 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
I believe in public transportation. It
is safe, reliable, better for the
environment, and it’s often times
just as efficient as a car.
1 .1 .1 85.4
I don't always have a ride 2 .2 .2 85.6
I don’t drive so when I can, I
like to ride the bus for my own
independence and also it’s better
for the environment.
1 .1 .1 85.7
I have e-tricycle and a segway
electric scooter
1 .1 .1 85.8
I have no license 1 .1 .1 86.0
I just do 1 .1 .1 86.1
I like taking the bus. I can chill out
and it feels safer than driving.
1 .1 .1 86.2
I like to enjoy the ride, and see the
city from the passenger seat.
1 .1 .1 86.3
I like to have the commute time to
relax instead of paying attention to
traffic, I don't have to worry about
parking. I believe taking public
transit makes cities nicer for
everyone; less pollution, l
1 .1 .1 86.4
I need for volunteer work and
doctors appointments, pay bills
1 .1 .1 86.5
I only get use of car part time. It
belongs to my sister.
1 .1 .1 86.6
I ride because it is much better for
the planet than driving. I want to
live in a Fresno one day where
FAX is used by more than a
quarter of city residents everyday.
1 .1 .1 86.8
I ride free. 1 .1 .1 86.9
I think it's very convenient and
quick for me
1 .1 .1 87.0
I use it because my parents don't
take me anywhere
1 .1 .1 87.1

83 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
I use it because, it's more
convenient
1 .1 .1 87.2
I use it because, it's more
convenient and cleaner for the
environment then my vehicle.
1 .1 .1 87.3
If you want to know the pace of
any city, hop on their public
transit. A lot easier east/west #9
to fresno st
1 .1 .1 87.4
I’m a minor and broke 1 .1 .1 87.6
Inconvenience of other
transportation.
1 .1 .1 87.7
It is less expensive 1 .1 .1 87.8
it is not my car 1 .1 .1 87.9
it's cheaper to ride FAX- if i drive i
have to pay for parking and gas
1 .1 .1 88.0
It's not mine it's my brothers 1 .1 .1 88.1
it's not my personal car 1 .1 .1 88.2
It’s good to save on gas 1 .1 .1 88.4
It’s cheaper and my car ride is not
as consistent
1 .1 .1 88.5
It’s free for fresno state students. 1 .1 .1 88.6
It’s free for fresno state students.

So when there's connectivity i
choose fax.
1 .1 .1 88.7
Just for the heck of it and
sometimes when something
happens that I need to use it
1 .1 .1 88.8
Just to use the car less 3 .3 .3 89.2
less expensive 1 .1 .1 89.3
less stress 1 .1 .1 89.4
limited income, disabled veteran 1 .1 .1 89.5
lyft and uber have increased
charges
1 .1 .1 89.6
Mass Transit important 1 .1 .1 89.7
more faster 1 .1 .1 89.8

84 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
my brother does not want to drop
me off that’s why i take the bus
1 .1 .1 90.0
my brother has other
responsibilities as well
1 .1 .1 90.1
my brother uses it 1 .1 .1 90.2
My car is not working 1 .1 .1 90.3
My child rides to get to school
when I am unable to drop off
3 .3 .3 90.6
My husband and I share the car.

So when I have to go to the office
I take bus while he’s at work
1 .1 .1 90.8
My neighbor isn't available to
drive me.
1 .1 .1 90.9
My vehicle is unreliable 1 .1 .1 91.0

NEEDED THE VEHICLE FOR
ANOTHER ERRAND.
1 .1 .1 91.1
no drivers license (medical) 1 .1 .1 91.2
no gas money 1 .1 .1 91.3
no license 1 .1 .1 91.4
not available 1 .1 .1 91.6
Not enough car to use 1 .1 .1 91.7
Occasionally taking a bus can
make people feel happy and calm
down to see the scenery outside
and the movement of people
1 .1 .1 91.8
other people use same vehicle 1 .1 .1 91.9
parking difficult 1 .1 .1 92.0
parking tough 1 .1 .1 92.1
reasonable fares 1 .1 .1 92.2
reduce air pollution, 1 .1 .1 92.4
reduces pollution 1 .1 .1 92.5
relax 1 .1 .1 92.6
Relax 1 .1 .1 92.7
Ride with family as a trip 1 .1 .1 92.8
safe 2 .2 .2 93.0
safer 1 .1 .1 93.2

85 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
safety 1 .1 .1 93.3
save gas 4 .5 .5 93.7
Save gas and money 1 .1 .1 93.8
Save gas. 2 .2 .2 94.1
save money 5 .6 .6 94.6
Save money 1 .1 .1 94.7
save money (gas and parking
permit) & exercise walking
1 .1 .1 94.9
save money on gas 1 .1 .1 95.0
save money, best way to go
across town, emergency rides
only-only way to travel
1 .1 .1 95.1
Save on gas 3 .3 .3 95.4
Saves me money on gas, is better
for the environment (less pollution
by my car), and so I don’t have to
drive and I can do other things
while riding the bus.
1 .1 .1 95.5
Saves money and time 1 .1 .1 95.7
saving gas 2 .2 .2 95.9
Saving money, driving on the road
is too tiring.
2 .2 .2 96.1
Share a vehicle 2 .2 .2 96.3
Share a vehicle with significant
other
1 .1 .1 96.5
share car 2 .2 .2 96.7
Shared vehicle 1 .1 .1 96.8
shopping for large items or long
distance
1 .1 .1 96.9
Siblings take it to work and also I
don't know how to drive a car
1 .1 .1 97.0
so that I don't tie up the only car
my family owns for a whole day
1 .1 .1 97.1
Sometime not available 1 .1 .1 97.3

86 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX--Not Vehicle
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Sometimes I am sick and can't
drive. No one is free to give me a
ride. Need to see my drs.
1 .1 .1 97.4
sometimes its easier to ride the
bus
1 .1 .1 97.5
Sometimes my boyfriend need it
for work so I don’t want to be
stuck at home so I take the bus
1 .1 .1 97.6
Sometimes to save gas or if I'm
drunk or hungover. Sometimes
just cause
1 .1 .1 97.7
Stress free 1 .1 .1 97.8
Take homeless students back and
forth
1 .1 .1 97.9
That car would be needing repairs 1 .1 .1 98.1
the place I need to go is close and
has limited parking
2 .2 .2 98.3
Tire flat currently 1 .1 .1 98.4
To help reduce vehicle pollution 1 .1 .1 98.5
To much hassle to arrange rides
with friends
2 .2 .2 98.7
to save gas and pollution 1 .1 .1 98.9
transportation with someone 1 .1 .1 99.0
Vehicle down 1 .1 .1 99.1
walk 1 .1 .1 99.2
We have one car and my husband
takes it to work so if I have doctor
appointments, i take the bus.

Also, when our car brakes down.
1 .1 .1 99.3
When I have to share my car 2 .2 .2 99.5
when not available 1 .1 .1 99.7
wife is busy with our daughters
activities
2 .2 .2 99.9
yes for medical 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

87 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Why Use FAX Coded
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Save on Gasoline/Bus Less
Expensive
55 6.3 27.1 27.1
Shared Vehicle Not Available 36 4.1 17.7 44.8
Ride not Available 13 1.5 6.4 51.2
Bus Easier/More Relaxing 27 3.1 13.3 64.5
Cannot Drive/No License 7 .8 3.4 68.0
Car Being Repaired/Not Reliable 13 1.5 6.4 74.4
Parking at Destination Difficult 7 .8 3.4 77.8
Good for Environment 19 2.2 9.4 87.2
Take Bicycle on Bus 3 .3 1.5 88.7
Safe 5 .6 2.5 91.1
Exercise/Fun 9 1.0 4.4 95.6
Other 9 1.0 4.4 100.0
Total 203 23.2 100.0
Missing System 673 76.8
Total 876 100.0

88 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Most Important Bus Service
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid On-Time Performance 202 23.1 31.0 31.0
Frequency of Buses 62 7.1 9.5 40.6
Time to Complete Trip 38 4.3 5.8 46.4
Cleanliness Inside Bus 24 2.7 3.7 50.1
COVID Safety Precautions 22 2.5 3.4 53.5
Cleanliness of Bus Stops and
Stations
15 1.7 2.3 55.8
Personal Safety On-Board 26 3.0 4.0 59.8
Personal Safety at Bus Stops and
Stations
21 2.4 3.2 63.0
Driver Courtesy 30 3.4 4.6 67.6
Driver Helpfulness 30 3.4 4.6 72.2
Driver Driving Skills 12 1.4 1.8 74.0
Driver Safety Awareness 16 1.8 2.5 76.5
Comfort of Bus 13 1.5 2.0 78.5
Availability of Route/Schedule Info 20 2.3 3.1 81.6
Hours of Operation Weekdays 20 2.3 3.1 84.6
Hours of Operation Weekends 28 3.2 4.3 88.9
Closeness of Bus Stops to Home 17 1.9 2.6 91.6
Closeness of Bus Stops to
Destination
13 1.5 2.0 93.5
Accessibility for People with
Disabilities
13 1.5 2.0 95.5
Quality of Audio and Visual
Announcements on Bus
12 1.4 1.8 97.4
Value for the Price 17 1.9 2.6 100.0
Total 651 74.3 100.0
Missing System 225 25.7
Total 876 100.0

89 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Second Most Important Bus Service
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid On-Time Performance 76 8.7 14.6 14.6
Frequency of Buses 77 8.8 14.8 29.3
Time to Complete Trip 28 3.2 5.4 34.7
Cleanliness Inside Bus 39 4.5 7.5 42.1
COVID Safety Precautions 22 2.5 4.2 46.4
Cleanliness of Bus Stops and
Stations
16 1.8 3.1 49.4
Personal Safety On-Board 30 3.4 5.7 55.2
Personal Safety at Bus Stops and
Stations
35 4.0 6.7 61.9
Driver Courtesy 25 2.9 4.8 66.7
Driver Helpfulness 17 1.9 3.3 69.9
Driver Driving Skills 11 1.3 2.1 72.0
Driver Safety Awareness 18 2.1 3.4 75.5
Comfort of Bus 14 1.6 2.7 78.2
Availability of Route/Schedule Info 19 2.2 3.6 81.8
Hours of Operation Weekdays 11 1.3 2.1 83.9
Hours of Operation Weekends 29 3.3 5.6 89.5
Closeness of Bus Stops to Home 13 1.5 2.5 92.0
Closeness of Bus Stops to
Destination
20 2.3 3.8 95.8
Accessibility for People with
Disabilities
9 1.0 1.7 97.5
Quality of Audio and Visual
Announcements on Bus
5 .6 1.0 98.5
Value for the Price 8 .9 1.5 100.0
Total 522 59.6 100.0
Missing System 354 40.4
Total 876 100.0

90 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Important to Have WiFi on Bus
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Very Important 313 35.7 41.4 41.4
Important 114 13.0 15.1 56.5
Slightly Important 125 14.3 16.5 73.0
Slightly Unimportant 49 5.6 6.5 79.5
Unimportant 79 9.0 10.4 89.9
Very Unimportant 76 8.7 10.1 100.0
Total 756 86.3 100.0
Missing System 120 13.7
Total 876 100.0

Active Duty Military or Veteran
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Yes 77 8.8 9.4 9.4
No 744 84.9 90.6 100.0
Total 821 93.7 100.0
Missing System 55 6.3
Total 876 100.0

Work Status
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Employed Full-Time 206 23.5 25.3 25.3
Employed Part-Time 113 12.9 13.9 39.2
Self-Employed 47 5.4 5.8 45.0
Student and Employed 56 6.4 6.9 51.8
Student and Not Employed 85 9.7 10.4 62.3
Homemaker 26 3.0 3.2 65.5
Retired 69 7.9 8.5 74.0
Unemployed 103 11.8 12.7 86.6
Disabled Unable to Work 109 12.4 13.4 100.0
Total 814 92.9 100.0
Missing System 62 7.1
Total 876 100.0

Last Grade in School Completed

91 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Less than 8th Grade 49 5.6 6.2 6.2
Some High School 105 12.0 13.2 19.3
High School Graduate 338 38.6 42.5 61.8
Vocational/Technical School 96 11.0 12.1 73.9
College Graduate 169 19.3 21.2 95.1
Post-Graduate Education 39 4.5 4.9 100.0
Total 796 90.9 100.0
Missing System 80 9.1
Total 876 100.0

Ethnic Background
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Hispanic 343 39.2 42.5 42.5
White/Caucasian 215 24.5 26.6 69.1
Black/African American 118 13.5 14.6 83.8
Asian/Southeast Asian 28 3.2 3.5 87.2
American Indian 17 1.9 2.1 89.3
Pacific Islander 3 .3 .4 89.7
Middle Eastern 1 .1 .1 89.8
Mixed Ethnicities 60 6.8 7.4 97.3
Other 22 2.5 2.7 100.0
Total 807 92.1 100.0
Missing System 69 7.9
Total 876 100.0

92 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Recoded Ethnicity--elim small categories
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Hispanic 343 39.2 42.5 42.5
White/Caucasian 215 24.5 26.6 69.1
Black/African American 118 13.5 14.6 83.8
Asian/Southeast Asian/Pacific
Islander
31 3.5 3.8 87.6
American Indian 17 1.9 2.1 89.7
Mixed Ethnicities 60 6.8 7.4 97.1
Other 23 2.6 2.9 100.0
Total 807 92.1 100.0
Missing System 69 7.9
Total 876 100.0

Asian Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 859 98.1 98.1 98.1
Asian Indian 1 .1 .1 98.2
Cambodian 2 .2 .2 98.4
Chinese 1 .1 .1 98.5
Hmong 2 .2 .2 98.7
Hmong 2 .2 .2 99.0
India 1 .1 .1 99.1
Indian 1 .1 .1 99.2
Indonesia 1 .1 .1 99.3
Laos, Hmong 2 .2 .2 99.5
Laotian 1 .1 .1 99.7
Malaysia 1 .1 .1 99.8
Vietnamese 1 .1 .1 99.9
Vietnamese 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

93 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Mixed Ethnicities Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 823 93.9 93.9 93.9
African American/middle
easterner
1 .1 .1 94.1
black/Mexican 1 .1 .1 94.2
black/white 2 .2 .2 94.4
black/white/native American 1 .1 .1 94.5
European/Black native 1 .1 .1 94.6
Filipino/Caucasian 1 .1 .1 94.7
Filipino/Mexican 1 .1 .1 94.9
Hisp/White 2 .2 .2 95.1
Hispanic/African American 2 .2 .2 95.3
Hispanic (25% Native American),
66% European
1 .1 .1 95.4
Hispanic and black 1 .1 .1 95.5
Hispanic, White/Caucasian 1 .1 .1 95.7
Hispanic/ African American 2 .2 .2 95.9
Hispanic/ African American 1 .1 .1 96.0
Hispanic/ pacific islander 2 .2 .2 96.2
Hispanic/ white 2 .2 .2 96.5
Hispanic/African American 1 .1 .1 96.6
Hispanic/African American 1 .1 .1 96.7
Hispanic/African American /Asian 1 .1 .1 96.8
Hispanic/American Indian 6 .7 .7 97.5
Hispanic/gypsy 1 .1 .1 97.6
Hispanic/indigenous 1 .1 .1 97.7
Hispanic/pacific islander 1 .1 .1 97.8
Hispanic/white 3 .3 .3 98.2
Hispanic/white 1 .1 .1 98.3
Hispanic/white/African American
/Asian
1 .1 .1 98.4
Indian/black 1 .1 .1 98.5
Mexican/Cambodian 1 .1 .1 98.6
Mexican/Chinese 1 .1 .1 98.7
multiple races 1 .1 .1 98.9
Non-Hispanic White and Asian 1 .1 .1 99.0

94 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Puerto Rican/ white 1 .1 .1 99.1
Vietnamese/Hispanic 2 .2 .2 99.3
White and Asian 1 .1 .1 99.4
White/American Indian 1 .1 .1 99.5
White/American Indian/pacific
islander
1 .1 .1 99.7
White/Hispanic 1 .1 .1 99.8
White/Hispanic 1 .1 .1 99.9
White/Mexican 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Other Ethnicity Specified
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 872 99.5 99.5 99.5
all 2 .2 .2 99.8
American 1 .1 .1 99.9
human 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 876 100.0 100.0

Respondent Age
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Under 18 47 5.4 6.3 6.3
18-34 241 27.5 32.3 38.6
35-54 270 30.8 36.1 74.7
55-74 171 19.5 22.9 97.6
75 or more 18 2.1 2.4 100.0
Total 747 85.3 100.0
Missing System 129 14.7
Total 876 100.0

95 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Household Income for Year--2021
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Less than $10,000 257 29.3 41.4 41.4
$10,000-$19,999 139 15.9 22.4 63.8
$20,000-$29,999 59 6.7 9.5 73.3
$30,000-$39,999 50 5.7 8.1 81.3
$40,000-$49,999 32 3.7 5.2 86.5
$50,000-$74,999 29 3.3 4.7 91.1
$75,000-$99,999 22 2.5 3.5 94.7
$100,000 or More 33 3.8 5.3 100.0
Total 621 70.9 100.0
Missing Do Not Know 139 15.9
System 116 13.2
Total 255 29.1
Total 876 100.0

Household Size
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 1 196 22.4 26.5 26.5
2 165 18.8 22.4 48.8
3 131 15.0 17.7 66.6
4 98 11.2 13.3 79.8
5 59 6.7 8.0 87.8
6 47 5.4 6.4 94.2
7 22 2.5 3.0 97.2
8 9 1.0 1.2 98.4
9 2 .2 .3 98.6
10 5 .6 .7 99.3
11 4 .5 .5 99.9
12 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 739 84.4 100.0
Missing System 137 15.6
Total 876 100.0

96 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Household Size Categorized
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 1 196 22.4 26.5 26.5
2 165 18.8 22.4 48.8
3 131 15.0 17.7 66.6
4 98 11.2 13.3 79.8
5 59 6.7 8.0 87.8
6 47 5.4 6.4 94.2
7-8 31 3.5 4.2 98.4
9 or more 12 1.4 1.6 100.0
Total 739 84.4 100.0
Missing System 137 15.6
Total 876 100.0

Gender
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Male 401 45.8 50.0 50.0
Female 394 45.0 49.1 99.1
Other 7 .8 .9 100.0
Total 802 91.6 100.0
Missing System 74 8.4
Total 876 100.0

Consider Yourself Limited in English
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Yes 164 18.7 20.7 20.7
No 591 67.5 74.6 95.3
Do Not Know 37 4.2 4.7 100.0
Total 792 90.4 100.0
Missing System 84 9.6
Total 876 100.0

97 2022 Customer Bus Satisfaction Survey Report Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Primary Language Spoken in Home
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid English 712 81.3 87.7 87.7
Spanish or Spanish Creole 86 9.8 10.6 98.3
Hmong 3 .3 .4 98.6
Punjabi 1 .1 .1 98.8
Other Indic (Indo-Aryan) 1 .1 .1 98.9
Laotian 2 .2 .2 99.1
Mon-Khmer/Cambodian 2 .2 .2 99.4
Chinese 2 .2 .2 99.6
Vietnamese 1 .1 .1 99.8
Armenian 1 .1 .1 99.9
Tagalog 1 .1 .1 100.0
Total 812 92.7 100.0
Missing System 64 7.3
Total 876 100.0

Recoded Language
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid English 712 81.3 87.7 87.7
Spanish 86 9.8 10.6 98.3
Various Asian Languages 14 1.6 1.7 100.0
Total 812 92.7 100.0
Missing System 64 7.3
Total 876 100.0

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

APPENDIX I: 2022 HANDY RIDE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

Fresno Area Express Title VI Plan

This page intentionally blank.

19

1 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Table of Contents
page

Key Survey Findings 2

Introduction and Methodology 8
Sample 9

Survey Findings 10
Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics 10
Handy Ride Customer Trip Characteristics 13
Customer Satisfaction with Handy Ride Service 19
Handy Ride Time-Related Considerations 35
Method of Fare Payment and Electronic Technology 45
Use of FAX Fixed Route Bus and Exclusive Reliance on Handy Ride 47 Covid Protocols 52

Appendix 54
Questionnaire 55
Frequencies 67
Open-Ended Responses 97

2 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Handy Ride 2022 Customer Satisfaction Report
Key Survey Findings
Fresno Area Express (FAX) has elected to conduct a statistically reliable customer opinion and satisfaction telephone survey among Handy Ride’s customer base. The purpose of the survey is t hreefold – first, to provide current information and opinions concerning customer satisfaction about the Handy Ride system, second to compare the results of this 2022 study with the results of prior satisfaction surveys (in particular, the 2018, 2014, and 2011 customer satisfaction studies), and third, to indicate any effects that the COVID pandemic may have had on travel behavior and bus satisfaction . Rea & Parker Research was selected to conduct the 2022 study, as it was for the 2018 and 2014 studies as well.

The survey was conducted by a random telephone sample of 254 customer respondents selected from a list of 2, 768 Handy Ride customers who had used the system within the past 3 years. This survey was conducted during the period February 12, 2022 through February 20, 2022. This sample yields a margin of error of +/-5.9 percent at the 95 percent level of confidence.

Sample

• Nearly two-thirds of respondents (66 percent) are female. • English is the primary language spoken in the home for over 9 in 10 (92 percent) of respondents. • Approximately, one-third (34 percent) of respondents are White followed by Hispanic/Latino (3 3 percent) and African American (19 percent).
• Nearly four -fifths of respondents (78 percent) earn an annual household income of less than $20,000 (40 percent less than $10,000 and 38 percent between $10,000 and $19,999). • Over one-fourth of respondents (26 percent) have a college degree or more education while nearly two-thirds (65 percent) have a high school education or less. • Nearly one-half of respondents (48 percent) are between 55 and 74 years of age and another 19 percent indicate that they are 75 years of age and above. • Over one-half of respondents (54 percent) are disabled and unable to work and another 23 percent are retired.
• The major residential zip codes of the respondents are as follows: 93727 (17 percent), 95726 (10 percent), and 93722, 93706, and 93710 (8 percent each). • Well over 9 in 10 respondents (94 percent) are neither active-duty military nor a U.S. Veteran.

Handy Ride Customer Trip Characteristics

• Approximately three-fourths (71percent) of Handy Ride customers have used the service for 1.5 years or more, including 51 percent that have used the service for 3 or more years. The current customers have somewhat less tenure as riders of Handy Ride than the customers in the 2018 and 2014 surveys (76 percent with more than 1.5 years as riders of Handy Ride in 2018 and 77 percent as riders of 1.5 years or more in 2014 ). These data reflect an increase in newer riders but demonstrate overall strong and sustained ridership on the Handy Ride system. • Over two-fifths (44 percent) of respondents make 1 to 2 one -way trips per week on Handy Ride, and this is consistent with the results of the 2018 survey where 40 percent of customers made 1 to 2 one-way trips per week and the 2014 survey where 39 percent made 1-2 one-way trips per week.

These findings for 2018 and 2014 represent a substantial change over the 2011 survey where 27 percent made 1-2 trips per week.

3 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• In 2022, 16 percent plan to take fewer Handy Ride trips in the next three months, and over one- fourth (28 percent) plan to take the same number of trips. In the prior survey periods, the proportion of customers planning to take the same number of trips in the coming 3 months was greater than in 2022 (likely related to COVID) and correspondingly, the proportion planning fewer trips was less in those earlier years. Only 4 percent plan to stop using the Handy Ride service – slightly higher than in previous years.
• Among the 48 percent of respondents who do not plan to take more Handy Ride trips in the next 3 months, the primary reason for making this decision is that they can make use of other travel modes (30 percent). Another 25 percent indicated that they have fewer appointments scheduled for them to attend.
• Nearly one-half (46 percent) of customers in the current survey have taken their most recent Handy Ride trip within the past 2 weeks. This finding indicates that current customers are making a substantially lower percentage of trips within the past 2 weeks than customers of previous survey periods. Current customers gave the following reasons for not taking Handy Ride trips during the last 3 months – COVID (8 percent), availability of a ride/have car (7 percent), and some degree of dissatisfaction with Handy Ride (4 percent).
• Three-fifths (60 percent) of customers indicate that their dominant trip purpose made on the Handy Ride system is going to appointments, such as doctors’ visits. This finding represents a decrease over the results in 2018 (72 percent with appointments as the dominant trip purpose). The current finding is more consistent with the results of the 2014 and 2011 surveys where 63 percent and 65 percent respectively indicated that appointments were their most common trip.

Customer Satisfaction with Handy Ride Service

• Handy Ride customers demonstrate a high level of satisfaction with the Fresno Area Express Handy Ride Service. In fact, 83 percent are either very satisfied (52 percent) or satisfied (31 percent). This high level of satisfaction is reflected in the overall mean satisfaction rating of 1.81 for the current survey (mean rating based upon a scale of 1 to 6, where 1 = very satisfied and 6 = very dissatisfied.

This pattern of high satisfaction with the Handy Ride service has been the pattern over the last 18 years – from 2004 to 2022.
• Among the five highest-rated Handy Ride features, customers provide the highest mean ratings for rating for drivers’ safety consciousness (mean of 1. 56) followed closely by drivers’ driving skills (mean of 1. 60), reservation staff’s implementation of COVID screening protocols , and drivers’ enforcement of COVID procedures (each a mean of 1.64), and value of Handy Ride service provided for the price (mean of 1.65). Generally, the mean overall satisfaction ratings for this first tier of highly-rated features in the 2022 survey are slightly lower than they were in the 2011, 2014, and 2018 surveys.
• The mean satisfaction ratings for the least highly rated Handy Ride features in the current survey are as follows: on-time to home or destination (mean of 2.22), locations/methods of payment (mean of 2.18), scheduled pickups (mean of 2.22), and will-call pickups (mean of 2.41 ). The overall finding is that regard ing these low-rated features, there is little to no improvement in customer satisfaction from 2011 to 2022.
• Customers indicate that pickups being on time (27 percent), drivers’ customer service (21 percent), and waiting times for pickups ( 9 percent) are most important to the ir level of satisfaction . This finding is consistent with the important features indicated by respondents in the 2011, 2014, and 2018 surveys.

4 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Older customers, those who are less likely to use smartphones or the Internet, frequent riders, and those who have experienced fewer wait time delays are the most satisfied among all subgroups of Handy Ride users.
• Based upon a satisfaction/importanc e quadrant analysis, drivers’ courtesy is the single strongest core characteristic that impacts their overall rating of the Handy Ride service as highly satisfactory.

Will-call pickups and scheduled pickups are two characteristics that are in particular need of improvement. These findings are consistent with the results of the quadrant analysis in the 201 8 survey.
• The “report card” that was developed for prior surveys shows that Handy Ride has been a consistent success, with the same high level of satisfaction found in 2011, 2014, and 2018 as well as the current year. Since 2014, however, customer satisfaction and service improvements are warranted in the following areas: getting you home to your destination on time, scheduled pickups, and will- call pickups.
• It is apparent that Handy Ride customers feel quite safe on Handy Ride vehicles. Specifically, 98 percent of customers feel either very sa fe (81 percent) or somewhat safe (17 percent). This is consistent with the results of the 2018 survey where, once again, nearly everyone (99 percent) indicated they felt either very safe or somewhat safe.

Handy Ride Time-Related Considerations

• The typical Handy Ride trip is 34.0 minutes (mean) and 30 minutes (median). The Handy Ride trip for 7 in 10 customers (70 percent) is 30 minutes or less. This is very consistent with the results of the 2018, 2014, and 2011 surveys where 71 percent, 72 percent, and 70 percent respectively had a typical trip last 30 minutes or less.
• It is noteworthy that , in the current survey, the typical mean wait time of 3 9.8 minutes and the median wait time of 30 minutes are considerably less than the maximum wait time guideline of 90 minutes allowed for will -call pickups. Moreover, nearly three in five respondents (5 7 percent) waited for a will-call pick up for 30 minutes or less. These typical wait times in 2022 are consistent with the findings in 2014 and 2018 where 53 percent and 59 percent of customers, respectively, had wait times of 30 minutes or less.
• In 2022, just over one-half (51 percent) of customers never waited more than 90 minutes for a will- call pickup. This finding is statistically consistent with the 2018 survey period where 56 percent of respondents never waited for a will-call pickup for more than 90 minutes. The 2022 result is also consistent with the 2014 and 2011 survey per iods – 47 percent never waited for more than 90 minutes in 2014 and 51 percent never waited longer than 90 minutes in 2011. • In the current survey, the mean longest wait time for a will -call pickup is 73. 9 minutes and the longest median wait time is 60 minutes – both averages are below the 90 -minute maximum that has been established as a guideline. This service level is consistent with the 2018 survey results where the mean longest wait time was 73.1 minutes, and the median was also 60 minutes. The wait times in 2022 and 2018 represent a considerable improvement over the 2014 survey period where the longest wait time was 82.9 minutes, and the median was 80 minutes. • There is a decline in will-call pickup service represented by the percentage of customers who waited 3 or more times for a will-call pickup. In 2018, only 11 per cent waited over 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions, while in the current year, 20 percent of respondents waited 3 or more times over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup.
• In 2022, the mean typical scheduled pickup time is 23.8 minutes, and the median scheduled pickup time is 20 minutes. Both averages are well within the window established for such scheduled pickups. In the current survey, 8 4 percent were picked up in 30 minutes or less. This is quite consistent with the 2018, 2014, 2011, and 2007 survey periods where 86 percent, 90 percent, 87

5 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
percent, and 92 percent of customers, respectively, were picked up within 30 minutes of their scheduled pickup time.
• In the current survey period (2022), more than t wo in five (4 2 percent) customers never waited more than 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup . This finding is consistent with the 2018 and 2011 results – in 2018, 40 percent of customers never waited more than 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup, and in 2011, 42 percent never waited more than 30 minutes. However, the results in 2014 represent an anomaly in that one-third (33 percent) of customers waited more than 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup.
• The mean longest wait for a scheduled pickup in 2022 is 41.5 minutes and the median is 30 minutes.

This result is consistent with the 2018 finding where the longest scheduled pickup wait was 41.4 minutes. These results for 2022 and 2 018 show an improvement over the 2014 survey where the mean wait time was 49.5 minutes and the median wait time was 45 minutes. • In the current survey, one-fifth (20 percent) of customers always allow a 2-hour window between their requested pickup time and their scheduled appointment with another 38 percent sometimes allowing a two-hour window. One-third (33 percent) are more likely to allow one hour or less. In 2018, one-fourth (25 percent) of respondents always allowed a 2-hour window with another 25 percent sometimes allowing a two-hour window.
• Over one-half (52 percent) of Handy Ride customers indicate that a Handy Ride vehicle has never arrived early for pickup. The finding in 2018 is similar in that 49 percent of customers never experienced a Handy Ride vehicle arriving early. In the 2011 and 2014 surveys, however, the findings are different and more favorable – 30 percent and 42 percent of customers, respectively, had never experienced a Handy Ride vehicle arriving early for pickup. • Over three-fourths (77 percent) of respondents would find a call helpful reminding them of their appointment. Among these respondents, 2 7 percent would find it helpful to have two calls —one on the night before their trip and another on the day of their trip ; 21 percent would want a call on the same day only, and another 29 percent on the night before only. There is a much stronger interest in 2022 than there was in 2018 and 2014 regarding such a reminder call. • Four-fifths (80 percent) of respondents are aware that repeated no-shows can result in a suspension of service; conversely, 20 percent are not aware of this possibility.

Method of Fare Payment and Electronic Technology

• Customers largely use cash to pay their Handy Ride fare, and this has been the case since 2004. In the current survey, approximately three-fourths (74 percent) pay their fare with cash. In previous survey periods, the percentages of customers who paid cash are as follows: 2004 –76 percent; 2007 – 72 percent, 2011 – 71 percent, 2014 – 77 percent, and 2018 – 76 percent. The alternative method of fare payment is the Handy Ride Pass (26 percent in 2022, 24 percent in 2018, 23 percent in 2014, and 29 percent in 2011.
• Nearly three-fifths (58 percent) of respondents indicate that they have the use of a smartphone.

This represents a slight increase in the use of a smartphone since the 2018 survey where 55 percent indicated that they used a smartphone. These findings demonstrate a notable and expected increase in the use of smartphones between 2014 and 2011 – 24 percent used smartphones in 2014 and 10 percent made use of them in 2011.
• In the current year, nearly two-thirds (66 percent) of smartphone users would use a mobile app for reservations if such an app were available.
• Among those customers who use the Internet at least once per week (58 percent), 40 percent have visited the FAX website. Among those respondents who do not use the Internet at least once per week, (42 percent), 15 percent have visited the FAX website. In general, 30 percent of all respondents have visited the FAX website.

6 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Use of FAX Fixed Route Bus and Exclusive Reliance on Handy Ride

• More than 7 in 10 (71) percent of Handy Ride customers either strongly agree (38 percent) or agree (33 percent) that they are totally dependent upon Handy Ride for their transportation needs. This represents an increase in Handy Ride dependency since 201 8 where 65 percent either strongly agreed or agreed that they were totally dependent on Handy Ride. The 2014 level of a greement regarding Handy Ride dependency was 70 percent, and in 2011, the level of dependency w as 64 percent.
• Two in five (40 percent) customers in the current year occasionally ride a FAX fixed -route bus.

This result is identical to the finding from the 2018 survey. Both the 2022 and 2018 survey findings represent a considerable increase in the use of the fixed -route bus over the 2014 and 2011 survey periods (32 percent usage in 2014 and only 18 percent in 2011). • Nearly one -fifth (19 percent) of those who have occasionally used the fixed -route bus did so because it is convenient to use such a bus to travel to a nearby destination. This reason is followed by the need to make a last-minute trip and did not have time to make a Handy Ride reservation (17 percent), the ability to travel to places not served by Handy Ride (15 percent) and to take advantage of the faster bus (9 percent). In 2018, the top reasons why Handy Ride customers used the fixed buses were the same as in 2022, but in different proportions. • Nearly two-fifths (37 percent) of 2022 Handy Ride customers would consider using wheelchair- accessible buses if FAX provided free training. This represents a slight increase over the 2018 survey where 33 percent would consider using wheelchair-accessible buses. In 2014 and 2011, there was considerably less interest in wheelchair-accessible buses among Handy Ride users (2014 –18 percent were interested; in 2011, 10 percent showed some interest).

Covid Protocols

• During COVID, nearly two-fifths (38 percent) of respondents took fewer Handy Ride trips. Another 10 percent took more trips and over one-third (33 percent) made no changes in the number of Handy Ride trips taken during COVID. Nearly one-fifth (18 percent) did not use Handy Ride at all during COVID.
• Among the 82 percent of respondents who used Handy Ride during COVID, over three-fifths (61 percent) used Handy Ride for medical/dental trips. Another 13 percent used Handy Ride for shopping trips, with social/recreation (7 percent), work/business (6 percent), and errands/personal (6 percent) following in order.
• Among the 56 percent of respondents who took fewer trips or no trips at all on Handy Ride during COVID, these respondents handled their transportation needs in the following ways: obtained rides from family and friends (45 percent), sta yed home more often (36 percent), used the FAX bus, medical transport, and their own car (12 percent), and used Uber, Lyft, and taxis (6 percent).

Conclusions
There is strong evidence that Handy Ride customers demonstrate a very high level of satisfaction for the services provided on the system. This high overa ll satisfaction with the Handy R ide system has been sustained and documented over 18 years – since the 2004 Customer Satisfaction Survey. This satisfaction is further evidenced by a strong record of customer retention.

7 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Features of the Handy Ride system that are closely related to the performance of the drivers demonstrate the highest levels of satisfaction. These include drivers’ driving skills and drivers’ safety consciousness and drivers’ enforcement of COVID safety protocols. Also among the most satisfactory features are the reservation staff’s COVID screening and the value of Handy Ride for the price. Driver courtesy is of relevance because it is not only satisfactory in the opinion of the customers, but it is also very important to them. Features of the Handy Ride system for which improvement would lead to even higher satisfaction ratings are will-call pickups, scheduled on-time pickups, and overall comfort of van or sedan.

8 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Introduction and Methodology

Fresno Area Express (FAX) is governed by the City of Fresno and is the largest public transportation provider in the Central San Joaquin Valley region, with 5.6 million passenger trips in FY 2021. FAX service consists of over 100 buses, approximately 1,500 bus stops , and 18 fixed routes in the City of Fresno including three major hubs: Downtown Transit Mall; Manchester Transit Center along Blackstone Avenue north of Shields; and a transfer point at River Park Shopping Center in north Fresno.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 requires public transportat ion agencies to provide paratransit service to eligible persons with disabilities. FAX, therefore, operates Handy Ride – a service designed to meet the transportation needs of eligible persons with disabilities who cannot functionally use the FAX fixed-route bus system. Handy Ride is a shared ride, curb -to-curb service that operates within area boundaries that are generally indicated to be Copper Avenue to the north, east to Willow Avenue, south to Ashlan Avenue, east to Temperance Avenue, south to Central Avenue, west to Polk Avenue, north to the Fresno County line, and east to Copper Avenue. Handy Ride provided 5.6 million customer trips in fiscal year 2021.

Handy Ride operates at the following hours:

Monday–Friday: 5:30 a.m.-12 midnight
Saturday: 6:30 a.m.–12 midnight.

Sunday: 6:30 a.m.—7:00 p.m.

Fresno Area Express has presently elected to conduct a statistically reliable customer opinion and satisfaction telephone survey among Handy Ride’s customer base. The purpose of the survey is twofold – first, to provide current information and opinions concerning customer satisfaction regarding the Handy Ride system, and second to compare the results of this 2022 study with the results of the 2011, 2014, and 2018 Handy Ride customer satisfaction studies. References will be made in the text to 200 4 and 2007, where it is noteworthy.

Rea & Parker Research was selected to conduct the 2022 study. Specifically, the research is to:
• Determine overall satisfaction with the services provided by the Handy Ride system. • Determine opinions and perceptions of various issues including:
o Safety on board Handy Ride vehicles
o Level of dependency on Handy Ride for transportation needs

9 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
o Wait times for will-call and scheduled pick-ups
o Use of the FAX fixed-route bus
o Number of weekly one-way trips on Handy Ride
o Trip purpose and length of time using Handy Ride
o Driver performance
o Comfort and cleanliness of vehicles
o Covid Protocols

• Obtain demographic data about the population for use in descriptive analysis and crosstabulations of data that can be useful in the development of policy. • Compare the results of this survey with the results of the 2018, 2014, and 2011Handy Ride customer satisfaction surveys.

Sample

A sample of 254 respondents was selected from a base of 2,768 Handy Ride customers who had used the system within the past 3 years. This sample size yields a margin of error of +/- 5.9 percent at the 95 percent level of confidence. This figure repre sents the widest interval that occurs when the survey question represents an approximate 50 percent-50 percent proportion of the sample. When it is not 50 percent, the interval is somewhat smaller. For example, in the survey findings that follow, 52 percent of respondents indicate that are very satisfied with the overall service provided by Handy Ride. This means that there is a 95 percent chance that the true proportion of the Handy Ride customer base (from which the sample was drawn) is between 46.1 percent and 57.9 percent (52 percent +/-5.9 percent).

If the customer was not able to respond to survey questions, the interviewer asked to speak with a caretaker or friend/relative, or someone willing to answer questions on behalf of the customer. Approximately 93 percent of the respondents were the customers, themselves. Another 4 percent of the respondents were friends or relatives of the customer and 3 percent were caregivers. The survey was administered in English and Spanish, and it was conducted from February 12, 2022 through February 20, 2022. The total survey cooperation rate was 75.6 percent, as indicated in Table 1 (254 successful interviews—57 refusals and 25 midterm terminations). This survey report has been divided into seven information components as follows:

• Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics
• Customer Satisfaction with Handy Ride Service
• Pickup and Wait Times on the Handy Ride System
• Other Handy Ride Time Considerations
• Handy Ride Customer Trip Characteristics
• Method of Fare Payment and Electronic Technology
• Use of FAX Fixed-Route Bus and Exclusive Reliance on Handy Ride • Covid Protocols

10 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Charts have been prepared for each of these major components depicting the basic survey results. Subgroup analyses for different age groups, various levels of education, gender, different income categories, and ethnicity of residents are presented in a succinct, bulleted format when statistical significance and relevance warrants such treatment.

Table 1
Call Dispositions
Frequency Percent
Initial Refusal 57 7.2
Deceased/Deaf 30 3.8
Disconnected # 13 1.6
Wrong # 109 13.7
No Answer/Blocked/Fax 21 2.6
Left Message 285 35.9
Terminated Midterm 25 3.2
Completed 254 32.0
Total 794 100.0

Lists of open-ended responses to survey questions, frequency distributions, and the survey instrument are contained in the Appendix.

Survey Findings

Demographic Statistics/Respondent Characteristics
Table 2 presents selected demographic char acteristics of the survey respondents. Nearly two-thirds of respondents (66 percent) are female, and English is the primary language spoken in the home for over 9 in 10 (92 percent) of respondents. Over one-fifth of respondents (22 percent) consider themselves to have limited English proficiency . Approximately one -third (34 percent) of respondents ar e White and an effectively equal percentage are Hispanic/Latino (33 percent), followed by African American (19 percent).

Nearly four-fifths of respondents (78 percent) earn an annual household income of less than $20,000 ( 40 percent less than $10,000 and 38 percent between $10,000 and $19,999). Nearly one-half of respondents (48 percent) are between 55 and 74 years of age and another 19 percent indicate that they are 75 years of age and above.

11 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Table 2:

Handy Ride Customer Demographics

Characteristic 2022 2018 2014 2011
Work Status
Disabled and Unable to Work 54% 65% 47% 42%
Retired 23% 24% 37% 35%
Student 5% 2% 3% 6%
Unemployed 5% 2% 11%
Employed Full-Time 4% 4% 5% 3%
Employed Part-Time 4% 4% 2% 3%
Homemaker 2% 1% 2% 0%
Self-Employed 1% 2% 0%

Age
Under 18-to-34 14% 8% 6% 6%
35-to-54 19% 18% 18% 26%
55-to-74 48% 58% 50% 41%
75 and Older 19% 16% 26% 27%

Education
Less than 8th Grade 5% 7% 6% 11%
Some High School 15% 15% 19% 15%
High School Graduate 45% 44% 41% 30%
Vocational/Technical School 9% 12% 13% 19%
College Graduate 26% 22% 21% 25%

Ethnicity
White 34% 39% 48% 43%
Hispanic/Latino 33% 31% 26% 26%
African American/Black 19% 21% 17% 24%
American Indian/Alaska
Native 2% 3% 3% 1%
Asian/Southeast Asian/
Filipino/Pacific Islander 7% 2% 5% 4%
Middle Eastern/Other 1% 1% 1% 1%
Mixed Ethnicities 4% 3% 2% 1%

Annual Household Income
Less than $10,000 40% 34% 32% 53%
$10,000-$19,999 38% 36% 41% 27%
$20,000-$29,999 11% 11% 12% 9%
$30,000-$39,999 8% 8% 5% 5%
$40,000-$49,999 1% 5% 4% 4%
$50,000 or more 2% 6% 6% 2%

12 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Table 2 (continued):

Handy Ride Customer Demographics

Characteristic 2022 2018 2014 2011
Gender
Male 34% 38% 34% 34%
Female 66% 62% 66% 66%

Limited English Proficiency
Yes 22%
No 78%

Primary Language in Home
English 92% 88% 92%
Spanish or Spanish Creole 5% 10% 6%
Punjabi 1%
Armenian 1%
Mon Khmer/ Cambodian,
Other Indic 1%

Major Residential Zip Codes
93727 17% 15% 12% 12%
93726 10% 10% 14% 7%
93722 8% 9% 13% 10%
93706 8% 6% 6% 9%
93710 8% 7% 6% 5%
93705 7% 9% 10% 7%
93721 6%
93702 6% 7% 5% 10%
93704 5% 4% 6%
93728 4% 5% 4%
93725 3%
93720 3% 5% 4%
93711 3% 6% 3% 6%
93703 3% 6% 6%

Active-Duty Military or U.S. Veteran
Yes 6%
No 94%

Respondent
Handy Ride Customer 93% 96% 93%
Friend or Relative of Customer 4% 3% 6%
Care Giver 3% 1% 1%

13 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Over one-fourth of respondents (2 6 percent) have a college degree or more education while nearly two- thirds (65 percent) have a high school education or less. Over one-half of respondents (54 percent) are disabled and unable to work and another 2 3 percent are retired. The major residential zip codes of the respondents are as follows: 93727 (1 7 percent), 93726 (10 percent), and 93722 , 93706 , and 93710 (8 percent each). Well over 9 in 10 re spondents (94 percent) are neither active -duty military nor a U.S.

Veteran.

Respondent characteristics for the Handy Ride surveys conducted in 2018 and 2014 and 2011 differ from the 2022 respondent characteristics in the following ways:

• In 2022, 54 percent of respondents reported being disabled and unable to work. This is a somewhat higher percentage than in 2014 (47 percent) and 2011 (42 percent) but notably lower than in 2018 (65 percent).
• In 2022 and 2018, nearly one-fourth (23 percent and 24 percent respectively) indicated that they are retired while 37 percent reported their work status as retired in 2014; similarly, in 2011, 35 percent of respondents indicated that they were retired. • Whites represent 34 percent of the sample in 2022 --- a decline from 2018 (39 percent) and from 2014 and 2011 where Whites represented 48 percent and 43 percent of their respective samples. • The percentage of households earning an annual income of less than $10,000 is 40 percent in 2022 which is somewhat higher than in 2018 (34 percent) and in 2014 (32 percent). However, it is notable that the percentage of households earning less than 10,000 in 2011 (53 percent) was considerably higher than in the three succeeding survey years. Conversely, in 2011, 27 percent earned between $10,000 and $19,999 while in 2022, 2014 and 2018, 38 percent 36 percent, and 41 percent respectively earned between $10,000 and $19,999. • In 2011, 56 percent of respondents reported having a high school education or less; in 2022, 65 percent reported this level of education, and similarly, in 2014 and 2018, 66 percent reported an education level of high school or less.

Handy Ride Customer Trip Characteristics
Chart 1 shows that approximately three-fourths (71 percent) of Handy Ride customers have used the service 1.5 years or more, including 51 percent that used the service for 3 or more years. The current customers have somewhat less tenure as riders of Handy Ride than the customers in the 2018 and 2014 surveys -- 76 percent of respondents were riders 1.5 years or more in 2018 and 77 percent were riders of

1.5 years or more in 2014. This is reflected in the increase in newer riders (less than one year) to 18 percent in 2022 versus 11 percent in 2018 and 14 percent in 2014. These data indicate a strong and sustained ridership on the Handy Ride system. This considerable retention of riders and small increase in newer riders is consistent with the very high level of satisfaction that is shown in the next section.

14 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

Chart 2 indicates that over two-fifths (44 percent) of respondents make 1 to 2 one -way trips per week on Handy Ride and this is consistent with the results of the 2018 survey where 40 percent of customers made 1- 2 one-way trips per week and the 2014 survey where 39 percent of customers made 1 to 2 one-way trips per week. Comparing the mean number of one-way trips in 2022 (mean = 3.78 one-way trips per week) and the mean number of such trips in prior years (2018 mean = 3.96; 2014 mean = 3.87 ) again demonstrates this consistent travel behavior by Handy Ride customers . These f indings for 2014 and 2018 represent a substantial change over the 2011 survey where 27 percent made 1-2 trips per week.

In the current survey year (2022), over one-half (52 percent) of respondents plan to make more Handy Ride trips in the next three months. This represents an increase in planned trips over the three previous survey periods where approximately two -fifths (41 percent to 43 percent) of respondents planned to take more Handy Ride trips in the next three months (Chart 3).
•
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Less than 3
Months
3-6 Months 7-11 Months 1-1.5 Years More than 1.5
Years and Less
than 3 Years
3 Years or More
2%
8% 8%
11%
20%
51%
1%
6%
4%
13%
16%
60%
3%
7%
4%
9%
16%
61%
4% 6% 6%
13%
71%
Chart 1
Length of Time Using Handy Ride
2022
2018
2014
2011

15 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Less than one trip
1-2 trips
3-4 trips
5-6 trips
7-8 trips
9-10 trips
More than 10 trips
17%
27%
17%
13%
9%
8%
9%
9%
39%
17%
15%
6%
10%
4%
10%
40%
24%
11%
4%
7%
4%
5%
44%
25%
13%
5%
6%
2%
Chart 2
Number of Weekly One-Way Trips
2022
2018
2014
2011
Mean Number of One-Way
Trips per Week
2022 = 3.78
2018 = 3.96
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
More
Fewer
Same
Plan to Stop Using Handy
Ride
52%
16%
28%
4%
43%
8%
48%
1%
39%
6%
54%
1%
41%
18%
39%
2%
Chart 3
Plan to Take More or Fewer Handy Ride Trips in Next 3 Months 2022
2018
2014
2011
Reasons: Now have a ride, Moving, and Poor Service

16 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
In 2022, 16 percent plan to take fewer Handy Ride trips in the next three months, and over one -fourth (28 percent) plan to take the same number of trips. In prior years, the proportion of customers planning to take the same number of trips in the coming 3 months was greater than in 2022 (likely related to COVID, as will be explored in a later section of this report), and correspondingly the proportion planning fewer trips was less in those earlier years. Only 4 percent plan to stop using the service—slightly higher than in past years.

Among the 4 8 percent of respondents who do not plan to take more Handy Ride trips in the next three months, the primary reason for making this decision is that they can make us e of other travel modes (30 percent--Chart 4). Another 25 percent indicated that they have fewer appointments scheduled for them to attend.

Have Other Travel
Mode, 30%
Fewer Appointments
Scheduled, 25%
Dissatisfaction with
Handy Ride, 11%
COVID, 9%
Too Ill/Injured, 7%
Not Working/No
School, 6%
Other (includes
"money" and "don't
know"), 12%
Chart 4
Why Not Planning More Handy Ride Trips In Next 3 Months (Among 48% Who Do Not Plan to Take More Handy Ride Trips)

17 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Chart 5 indicates that nearly one-half (46 percent) of customers in the current survey have taken their most recent Handy Ride trip within the past 2 weeks. This finding indicates that current customers (2022) are making a substantially lower percentage of trips within the past 2 weeks than customers of previous survey periods. Specifically, in the 2018, 2014, and 2011 survey periods, 63 percent, 67 percent, and 62 percent , respectively, took their most recent ride within the past 2 weeks. This finding is further confirmed by noting that over one-fourth (26 percent) of current customers (2022) made their most recent Handy Ride trip over three months ago. This is a considerably longer period than customers of the 2018, 2014, and 2011 surveys.

Respondents indicated several reasons for not taking Handy Ride trips during the last 3 months: The dominant reasons are C OVID (8 percent), availability of a ride/ have car (7 percent), and some degree of dissatisfaction with Handy Ride (4 percent).

Three-fifths (60 percent) of customers indicate that their dominant trip purpose made on the Handy Ride system is going to appointments, such as doctors’ visits (Chart 6). This finding represents a decrease over the results in 2018 (72 percent with appointments as the dominant trip purpose). The current finding is more consistent with the results of the 2014 and 2011 surveys where 63 percent and 65 percent, respectively, indicated that appointments were their most common trip. In 2007 and 2004, appointments comprised 78 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Within Past 2 Weeks More than 2 Weeks but
Less than One Month
Ago
Within Past 1-3 Months More than 3 Months
Ago
46%
14% 14%
26%
63%
11%
19%
7%
67%
13%
17%
3%
62%
18%
12%
8%
Chart 5
Most Recent Handy Ride Trip
2022
2018
2014
2011
2022: Reasons for No Trips in Past 3 Months:

COVID = 8%
Got Ride/Have Car = 7%
Dissatisfied with Handy Ride = 4%
Too Ill/Injured = 2%
No Work/No School = 2%
Fewer Appointments = 1%
Location Not Served = 1%
Not Needed = 1%

18 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
percent of trips taken on the Handy Ride system It is noteworthy that in the current survey, 10 percent of trips were made for purposes of shopping—a slight increase from 7 percent in 2018. ▪ As would be expected, c ustomers, who travel to and from medical/dental appointments as their most common trips, are older (75 years of age and over (66.7 percent) as opposed to those who are younger -- 55 – 74 years of age (46.4 percent).
▪ Customers who typically pay their fare with cash travel to and from medical/dental appointments as their most common trip (66 percent) more than do those customers who tend to use the Handy Ride Pass (43 percent).
▪ Customers, who travel to and from work a s their dominant trip purpose, primarily use the Handy Ride Pass (18 percent) to pay their fare as opposed to using cash (4 percent).

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
60%
10%
7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 2% 1%
72%
7%
5%
7%
4% 2% 3%
63%
6% 7%
17%
5%
2%
65%
7% 6% 8%
5%
9%
Chart 6
Usual Trip Purpose
2022
2018
2014
2011
2022 Social and Entertainment separated:

Friends/Family = 3%--Entertainment/Dining =3%

19 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
Customer Satisfaction with Handy Ride Service

Overall Satisfaction: Chart 7 shows that Handy Ride customers demonstrate a high level of satisfaction with the Fresno Area Express Handy Ride Service. In fact, 83 percent are either very satisfied (52 percent) or satisfied (31 percent). This high level of satisfaction is reflected in the overall mean satisfaction rating of 1.81 for the 2022 survey (mean rating based upon a scale of 1 to 6, where 1 = very satisfied and 6 = very dissatisfied). This level of satisfaction is relatively consistent with the satisfaction level s in 2011 (88 percent were either very satisfied or satisfied), in 2014 (83 percent were either very satisfied or satisfied), and in 2018 (87 percent were either very satisfied or satisfied). Similarly, the mean satisfaction ratings in 2011 (1.67), in 2014 (1.75), and 2018 (1.73) are comparable (although a little lower) to the mean satisfaction level of 1.81 in 2022. This pattern of high satisfaction with the Handy Ride service has been the pattern over the last 18 years – in the 2004 survey, the overall mean satisfaction rating was 1.70 and in 2007, the mean rating was 1.91.

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Very Satisfied Satisfied Slightly Satisfied Slightly
Dissatisfied
Dissatisfied Very
Dissatisfied
52%
31%
8%
5% 4%
52%
35%
7%
3% 2% 1%
60%
23%
8%
3% 4% 2%
55%
33%
9%
2% 1%
Chart 7
Satisfaction with Overall Service
2022
2018
2014
2011
Mean ratings (scale 1-to-6: 1 = Very satisfied)
2022 = 1.81
2018 = 1.73
2014 = 1.75
2011 = 1.67

20 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the overall performance of the Handy Ride System: (scale: 1 = very satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = slightly satisfied, 4 = slightly dissatisfied, 5 = dissatisfied, and 6 = very dissatisfied):

• Customers who have taken more recent Handy Ride trips (trips taken during the last 4 weeks (mean of 1.63) versus customers whose last Handy Ride trip was more than 3 months ago (mean of 2.20). • Older customers – 55-74 (mean of 1.58) versus younger customers – under 55 – (mean of 2.08). • Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.58) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 1.96).
• Customers who feel very safe (mean of 1.68) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.33) inside Handy Ride vehicles.
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with the overall performance of the Handy Ride system (strongly agree—mean of 1.44 versus strongly disagree (mean of 2.36) and disagree (mean of 2.69)).
• Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup (mean of 1.61) and those who had to w ait more than 90 minutes on only one or two occasions (means of 1.81) versus customers who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.30). • Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pick (mean of 1.68) and those who had to wait for a scheduled pickup more than 30 minutes once or twice (mean of 1.61) versus customers who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.17).

Satisfaction with Features of Handy Ride Service: Charts 8 through 11 display satisfaction ratings for various features of Handy Ride service. Chart 8 depicts the level of satisfaction associated with the highest rated Handy Ride features. In the current survey, customers provide the highest mean ratings for drivers’ safety consciousness (mean of 1.56) followed by drivers’ driving skills (mean of 1.60), reservation staff’s implementation of COVID screening protocols, and drivers’ enforcement of COVID procedures (each a mean of 1.64), and value of Handy Ride service provided for the price (mean of 1.65). Generally, the overall mean satisfaction ratings for this first tier of features in the 2022 survey are somewhat less favorable than they were in the 2018, 2014, and 2011 surveys. It is noteworthy that in 2022, 65 percent of respondents are very satisfied with drivers’ traffic safety consciousness – a lower level of satisfaction than in 2014 and 2011 when the very satisfied respondents reached 74 percent and 76 percent, respectively.

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the drivers’ traffic safety consciousness:
(scale: 1 = very satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = slightly satisfied, 4 = slightly dissatisfied, 5 = dissatisfied, and 6 = very dissatisfied):

• Older customers 55 - 74 (mean of 1.33) as opposed to younger customers -- under 35 (mean of

1.97)
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with drivers’ traffic safety consciousness (strongly agree—mean of 1.36 versus agree (mean of 1.75).

21 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Customers who have not visited the FAX website (mean of 1.48) as opposed to those who have visited this website (mean of 1.76).
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.37) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 1.70).

1.20 1.30

1.40 1.50

1.60 1.70

1.80 Drivers' Traffic
Safety
Consciousness
Drivers' Driving
Skills
Reservation Staff's
Implementation of
COVID Screening
Drivers'
Enforcement of
COVID Procedures
Value Provided for
Price

1.56 1.60

1.64 1.64 1.65

1.45 1.57

1.58 1.40

1.39 1.62

1.43 1.47

2.24 Chart 8
Mean Satisfaction Ratings for Highest Rated Handy Ride
Features
(scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022
2018
2014
2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 65% 2022 = 62% 2022 = 61% 2022 = 60% 2022 = 60% 2018 = 67% 2018 = 61% 2018 = 62% 2014 = 74% 2014 =75% 2014 = 65% 2011 = 76% 2011 = 62% 2011 = 43%

22 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the drivers’ driving skills:

• Customers who have taken more recent Handy Ride trips (trips taken during the last 4 weeks (mean of 1.42) versus customers whose last Handy Ride trip was more than 3 months ago (mean of 1.91). • Customers who are 55 – 74 years old (mean of 1.32) versus all other age groups (mean of 1.85) • Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup (mean of 1.42) versus those who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 1.76) and had to wait more than 90 minutes on only one or two occasions (means of 1.76).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the reservation staff’s implementation of Covid screening procedures:

• Customers who pay their fare with cash (mean of 1.54) versus those who pay with the Handy Ride Pass (mean of 1.91).
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with the reservation staff’s implementation of Covid screening (strongly agree—mean of 1.39 and agree – mean of 1.82) versus strongly disagree (mean of 3.00).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the drivers’ enforceme nt of COVID procedures:

• Older customers – 55 - 74 (mean of 1.39) versus younger customers – under 35 (mean of 2.16). • Customers who do not use a smartphone (mean of 1.40) versus those who do use a Smart phone (mean of 1.79).
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.45) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 1.77).
• Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup (mean of 1.66) or only had to wait more than 30 minutes once or twice (mean of 1.41) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 1.88).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the value of Handy Ride provided for the price:

• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.46) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 1.78).
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with the value provided for the price (strongly agree— mean of 1.45 versus strongly disagree (mean of 2.18) and disagree (mean of 2.17). • Customers who had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup once or twice (mean of 1.47) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 1.87).

Chart 9 indicates mean satisfaction ratings for the mid-to-high rated group of Handy Ride features. In the current survey, mean ratings are as follows: cleanliness inside Handy Ride vehicles (mean of 1.7 0), reservation staff’s courtesy (mean of 1.7 4), and drivers’ courtesy (mean of 1.76). Approximately three- fifths of customers (range of 57 percent to 63 percent) are very satisfied with the service provided by these

23 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
features. As with the higher-rated features, satisfaction ratings have declined somewhat from earlier surveys.

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with cleanliness inside Handy Ride vehicles:
(scale: 1 = very satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = slightly satisfied, 4 = slightly dissatisfied, 5 = dissatisfied, and 6 = very dissatisfied):

• Older customers – 55-74 years of age (mean of 1.50) versus younger customers – under 35-- (mean of 1.91).

1.20 1.30

1.40 1.50

1.60 1.70

1.80 1.90

2.00 Cleanliness Inside Handy Ride
Vehicles
Reservation Staff's Courtesy Drivers' Courtesy

1.70 1.74

1.76 1.53

1.62 1.52

1.46 1.52

1.39 1.47 1.47 1.47
Chart 9
Mean Satisfaction Ratings for Mid-to-High Rated Group of Handy Ride Features
(scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022
2018
2014
2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 58% 2022 = 57% 2022 = 63% 2018 = 64% 2018 = 58% 2018 = 64% 2014 = 72% 2014 = 69% 2014 = 76%

24 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with cleanliness inside Handy Ride vehicles (strongly agree—mean of 1.49 versus agree (mean of 1.99)).
• Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup (mean of 1.70) or only had to wait more than 30 minutes once or twice (mean of 1.59) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 1.83).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with reservation staff’s courtesy:

• Older customers – 55-74 (mean of 1. 49) as opposed to younger customers – under 55 (mean of

2.10).
• Customers who do not use a smart phone (mean of 1.51) versus those who do use a Smart phone (mean of 1.89).
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.49) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 1.91).
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with the reservation staff’s courtesy (strongly agree— mean of 1.49) versus strongly disagree (mean of 2.55) and disagree (mean of 2.23). • Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup (mean of 1.56) versus those who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.04).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the Drivers’ courtesy:

• Females (mean of 1.59) as opposed to males (mean of 1.96). • Customers who have not visited the FAX website (mean of 1.65) as opposed to those who have visited this website (mean of 2.01).
• Customers who do not use a smartphone (mean of 1.55) versus those who do use a smartphone (mean of 1.89).

Chart 10 shows mean satisfaction ratings for the lower/middle rated group of Handy Ride features. The mean satisfaction ratings for these features in the current survey are as follows: reservation policy – reserve 1-2 days in advance (mean of 1.82), service hours (mean of 1.8 4), reservation hours (mean of 1.84), availability of Handy Ride information (mean of 1.88), reservation staff’s accuracy (mean of 1.94), and overall comfort of the van or sedan (mean of 1.98). Respondents who indicated that they are very satisfied with these features range from 49 percent (overall comfort of the van or sedan) to 54 percent (reservation policy – reserve 1-2 days in advance). There is minimal to no improvement in satisfaction associated with these lower/middle rated features since the 2014 and 2018 surveys.

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with reservation policy—reserve 1-2 days in advance: (scale: 1 = very satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = slightly satisfied, 4 = slightly dissatisfied, 5 = dissatisfied, and 6 = very dissatisfied):

• Customers whose Handy Ride trip was more recent (trip less than 4 weeks ago – mean of 1.4 2) versus those who used Handy Ride more than 3 months ago (mean of 2.16). • Vocational school students (mean of 1.39) as opposed to college graduates (mean of 2.02).

25 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.61) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 1.97).
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with a 1–2-day advance reservation policy (strongly agree—mean of 1.53 and agree (mean of 1.84) versus disagree (mean of 3.00).

1.30 1.40

1.50 1.60

1.70 1.80

1.90 2.00

2.10 2.20
Reservation
Policy--Reserve
1-2 Days in
Advance
Service Hours Reservation
Hours
Availability of
Handy Ride
Information
Reservation
Staff's Accuracy
Overall Comfort
of Van or Sedan

1.82 1.84 1.84

1.88 1.94

1.98 1.95

1.72 1.88

1.76 1.87

1.72 1.68

1.81 1.85

1.72 1.86

1.63 1.55

1.98 1.92

1.77 1.67

1.75 Chart 10
Mean Satisfaction Ratings for Lower/Middle Rated Group
of Handy Ride Features
(scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022
2018
2014
2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 54% 2022 = 51% 2022 = 53% 2022 = 51% 2022 = 49% 2022 = 49% 2018 = 49% 2018 = 51% 2018 = 46% 2018 = 50% 2018 = 49% 2018 = 53% 2014 = 63% 2014 = 56% 2014 = 56% 2014 = 57% 2014 = 55% 2014 = 62% 2011 = 60% 2011 = 42% 2011 = 38% 2011 = 42% 2011 = 56% 2011 = 50%

26 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with service hours:
• Customers who have not visited the FAX website (mean of 1.73) as opposed to those who have visited this website (mean of 2.11).
• Customers who feel very safe (mean of 1.72 ) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.32) inside Handy Ride vehicles.

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with reservation hours:
• Customers whose Handy Ride trip was more recent (trip less than 4 weeks ago – mean of 1. 58) versus those who used Handy Ride more than 3 months ago (mean of 2.28). • Customers who have not visited the FAX website (mean of 1.72) as opposed to those who have visited this website (mean of 2.11).
• Customers who feel very safe (mean of 1.70) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.27 ) inside Handy Ride vehicles.
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with reservation hours (strongly agree—mean of 1.64) versus strongly disagree (mean of 2.50) and disagree (mean of 2.79). • Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pick up (mean of 1.60) versus those who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.22) or had to wait more than 90 minutes on 1 or 2 occasions (mean of 2.00). • Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup (mean of 1.65) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.09). • Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.63) versus those customers who do use the Internet (mean of 1.98).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the availability of Handy Ride information:
• Older customers ages 55-74 (mean of 1.70) as opposed to younger customers – under 35 (mean of

2.27).
• Females (mean of 1.73) versus males (mean of 2.12).
• Pacific Islanders (mean of 1.25), African Americans (mean of 1.38), and Hispanics (mean of

1.83) versus Asians (mean of 2.78) and Whites (2.13).
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.63) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 2.06).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the reservation staff’s accuracy:
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.65) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 2.13).
• Customers who feel very safe (mean of 1.81) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.39) inside Handy Ride vehicles.
• Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup (mean of 1.77) or only had to wait more than 30 minutes once or twice (mean of 1.88) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.18).

27 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Customers who are employed part-time (mean of 1.80), homemakers (mean of 1.67), and retirees (mean of 1.66) versus those who are unemployed (mean of 2.91).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with the overall comfort of the van or sedan • African Americans (mean of 1.52) as opposed to Whites (mean of 2.37). • Customers who do not ride FAX buses (1.84) versus those who have ridden the FAX bus (2.25). • Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup (mean of 1. 71) versus those who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.33) or had to wait over 90 minutes on 1 or 2 occasions (mean of 2.22).
• Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup (mean of 1.84) or only had to wait more than 30 minutes once or twice (mean of 1.85) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.32).
• Customers who feel very safe (mean of 1.86) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.41) inside Handy Ride vehicles.

Chart 11 demonstrates mean satisfaction ratings for the lowest-rated group of Handy Ride features. These four ratings are as follows: on-time to home or destination (mean of 2.12), locations/methods of payment (mean of 2.18), scheduled pickups (mean of 2.22) and will-call pickups (mean of 2.41). Respondents who are very satisfied with these features (range from 3 6 percent ( will-call pickups) to 47 percent (locations/methods of payment). The overall finding is that regarding these low-rated features, there is little to no improvement shown from 2011 to 2022.

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with on -time service to their home or destination: (scale: 1 = very satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = slightly satisfied, 4 = s lightly dissatisfied, 5 = dissatisfied, and 6 = very dissatisfied):

• Customers whose Handy Ride trip was more recent (trip less than 4 weeks ago – mean of 1.92) versus those who used Handy Ride 1 to 3 months ago (mean of 2.57). • Customers who feel very safe (mean of 1.96) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.85) inside Handy Ride vehicles.
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with on -time service to their home or destination (strongly agree—mean of 1.78) versus strongly disagree (mean of 3.18). • Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup (mean of 1.97) and those who had to wait over 90 minutes on 1 or 2 occasions (mean of 2.07) versus those who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.61). • Customers who are employed part-time (mean of 1.73), retirees (mean of 1 .75), disabled individuals (mean of 2.20), and those who are unemployed (mean of 2.25) as opposed to customers who are self-employed (mean of 4.00).

28 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with locations/methods of payment:

• Older customers – 55-74 (mean of 1.78) versus younger customers – under 35 (mean of 2.61). • Customers whose most recent trip was only 2 weeks to 1 month ago (mean of 1.61) versus those whose last Handy Ride Trip was more than 3 months ago (mean of 2.74). • Customers who have not visited the FAX website (mean of 2.01) as opposed to those who have visited this website (mean of 2.51).
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 1.86) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 2.36).

1.60 1.70

1.80 1.90

2.00 2.10

2.20 2.30

2.40 2.50

2.60 On-Time to Home or
Destination
Locations/Methods of
Payment
Scheduled Pickups Will Call Pickups

2.12 2.18

2.22 2.41

2.07 2.16

2.51 2.23

2.09 2.57

1.89 2.08

2.18 Chart 11
Mean Satisfaction Ratings for Lowest Rated Group of
Handy Ride Features
(scale: 1 = Very Satisfied: 6 = Very Dissatisfied)
2022
2018
2014
2011
Very Satisfied
2022 = 39% 2022 = 47% 2022 = 40% 2022 = 36% 2018 = 40% 2018 = 38% 2018 = 34%
2014 = 40% 2014 = 40% 2014 = 34% 2011 = 46% 2011 = 37% 2011 = 37%

29 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) April 2022
• Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup (mean of 1.91) or had to wait over 30 minutes on 1 or 2 occasions (mean of 1.98) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.77).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with scheduled pickups:

• Customers who feel very safe (mean of 2.09) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.63) inside Handy Ride vehicles.
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs and indicate a greater level of satisfaction with scheduled pickups (strongly agree—mean of

2.01) versus strongly disagree (mean of 3.00) and disagree (mean of 3.50). • Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup (mean of 1.84) and those who had to wait over 90 minutes on 1 or 2 occasions (mean of 2.17) versus those who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 3.16). • Customers who never had to wait over 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup (mean of 1.82) and had to wait over 30 minutes on 1 or 2 occasions (mean of 2.08) versus those who had to wait more than 30 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 2.87).

The following subgroups are more likely to be satisfied with will-call pickups:

• Customers whose latest Handy Ride trip occurred recently – within the last 2 weeks (mean of 2.19) versus those whose latest trip was more than 3 months ago (mean of 2.52). • Customers who have not visited the FAX website (mean of 2.27) as opposed to those wh o have visited this website (mean of 2.75).
• Customers who do not use the Internet (mean of 2.13) versus those who do use the Internet (mean of 2.63).
• Customers who feel very safe (mean of 2.25) versus somewhat safe (mean of 2.98) inside Handy Ride vehicles.
• Customers who are more in agreement that they depend on Handy Ride for all their transportation needs indicate a greater level of satisfaction with will-call pickups (strongly agree—mean of 1.98) versus strongly disagree (mean of 3.86) and disagree (mean of 4.31). • Customers who never had to wait over 90 minutes for a will-call pickup (mean of 1.99) versus those who had to wait over 90 minutes on 1 or 2 occasions (mean of 2.52) and those who had to wait more than 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions (mean of 3.27).

Most Important Features Impacting Customer Satisfaction: Respondents were asked to indicate up to two “most important” features of Handy Ride service that impact their level of satisfaction with the service. Chart 12 shows that pickups being on time (27 percent), drivers’ customer service (21 percent), and waiting times for pickups (9 percent) are most important to the respondents. This finding is consistent with the important features indicated by respondents in the 2018, 2014, and 2011 surveys.

19 27%
21%
9%
5%
5%
5%
4%
3%
3%
3%
3%
2%
44%
33%
22%
7%
6%
4%
7%
9%
7%
3%
2%
38%
25%
23%
8%
6%
8%
7%
6%
5%
40%
22%
21%
4%
14%
7%
14%
4%
3%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Pickups being on time
Drivers' customer service
Waiting times for pickups
Reservation staff's customer
service
Drivers' driving skills
Hours of operation
Overall Comfort of Van/Sedan
Safety on board van/sedan
Reservation staff's accuracy
Reservation hours
Cost
Cleanliness Inside Handy Ride
Vehicles
Chart 12
Most Important Handy Ride Features in Determining
Customer Level of Satisfaction
NOTE: Respondents Could Provide Two Important Features--Percentages Sum to >100% 2022
2018
2014
2011
Other Features mentioned by1%:

Civility/Courtesy of Other Riders,
COVID Safety
Locations Served
Curbside Pick Up
Wheelchair/Disability Access
Arrival Time at Destination

31 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Satisfaction/Importance Quadrant Analysis : Levels of satisfaction can be mapped on a chart with importance, such that satisfaction is graphically measured against how important an issue is in four cells as follows:

▪ The upper -right quadrant represents features that display both high satisfaction and high importance. Characteristics in this quadrant are ones with high levels of satisfaction and high levels of importance. These characteristics, therefore, are the core characteristics that make the Handy Ride system a highly valued service.
▪ The lower-right quadrant represents features that display high satisfaction but have less importance.

These characteristics might be considered to be ones that are over -provided and could be reduced somewhat in reallocating resources to other quadrants—especially the two upper quadrants. ▪ The lower-left quadrant represents features that have both less satisfaction and less importance.

Because these features are of relatively low impo rtance, efforts to improve these characteristics will have a relatively minor impact on overall satisfaction. ▪ The upper-left quadrant represents features that provide less satisfaction but are of high importance.

The upper-left quadrant is critically important because it contains those system characteristics that are important to respondents but are not provided as well as other characteristics are provided. It is these characteristics that can increase satisfaction to the greatest extent.

Chart 13 is a satisfaction/importance quadrant analysis f or the data provided in the 20 22 Handy Ride survey. In the upper right quadrant, there is one feature that dominates: drivers’ courtesy. This is the single core characteristic that leads to high degrees o f satisfaction and greatly contributes to the overall rating of the Handy Ride service as highly satisfactory. Also in this quadrant, but close to the margins, are the reservation staff courtesy, drivers’ safety consciousness , service hours, value provide d for the price, and reservation hours . The upper left quadrant shows two dominant characteristics, the improvement of which would greatly enhance the already high level of satisfaction with Handy Ride. These features are will-call pickups and scheduled pickups on time. Also in this quadrant is the overall comfort of the vehicle. Customers regard these features as highly important to them but have not been provided to them with the same high level of satisfaction of other features. These features were also plotted in the same quadrants in the 201 8 survey indicating a great deal of consistency in h ow customers feel about the importance and level of satisfaction regarding these Handy Ride features. In 2018, overall comfort of van or sedan was in the upper right quadrant, while in 2022, this feature was in the upper left, indicating a decline in satisfaction, while still very important.

32 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Most features are either very satisfactory but not especially important (e.g. COVID procedures by drivers and reservation staff and cleanliness inside the vehicle) or are neither very satisfactory nor especially important (e.g. Locations/methods of payment and, surprisingly, on time to home or destination).

Drivers' Safety
Consciousness
Drivers' Courtesy
Cleanliness Inside Handy
Ride Vehicles
Drivers' Driving Skills
Value Provided for Price
Reservation Staff's
Courtesy
Overall Comfort of Van
or Sedan
Reservation Policy--
Reserve 1-2 Days in
Advance
Availability of Handy
Ride Information
Service Hours
Reservation Hours
Reservation Staff's
Accuracy
Scheduled Pickups On
Time
Will Call Pickups
Reservation Staff COVID
Screening
Drivers' Enforcement of
COVID Procedures
Locations/Methods of
Payment
On Time to Home or
Destination
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%

0.000.501.001.502.002.503.00
Chart 13
Satisfaction/Importance Quadrant Analysis
Greater Importance
Higher Satisfaction

33 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Handy Ride Report Card: In the 2018, 2014, and 2011 customer satisfaction reports for Handy Ride, letter grades for Handy Ride’s performance on the various service characteristics were assigned. These reports assigned grades of A, B, C, D or F (including plus and minus distinctions) based upon the mean ratings provided for each characteristic. The same scale was also used in assigning grades for the Handy Ride service in this 2022 Customer Satisfaction Report. The grading scale used in the previous reports as well as the current report is depicted in Table 3 below.

Table 4 shows the mean ratings and grades for 2022, 2018, 2014, and 2011and shows the same information that can be found in the charts above with the exception that the grades provide a more aggregated summary of the data. It is evident that in terms of overall service, the same high level of satisfaction found in 2011, 2014, and 2018 exists in the current year (2022). Specifically, the overall service is rated A- in all four of the survey periods. Service improvements are called for in the following areas: getting you home or to your destination on time, scheduled pick ups, and will-call pick ups. It is noteworthy that service in these 3 areas has remained in the B and B+ range since 2011. Customer ratings have declined from A to A - in the following 3 service areas since the 2018 survey period: cleanliness inside Handy Ride vehicles, reservation staff’s courtesy, and drivers’ courtesy. Regarding the enforcement of COVID protocol in the current year, customers rated the following two service characteristics with an A: reservation staff’s implementation of COVID screening and drivers’ enforcement of COVID procedures.

Table 3
Handy Ride Performance Letter Grading Scale
(Based on 1-6 ratings, where 1 = Very
Satisfied) and 6 = Very Dissatisfied

1.00 to 1.33 A+

1.34 to 1.67 A

1.68 to 1.99 A-

2.00 to 2.33 B+

2.34 to 2.67 B

2.68 to 2.99 B-

3.00 to 3.33 C+

3.34 to 3.67 C

3.68 to 3.99 C-

4.00 to 4.33 D+

4.34 to 4.67 D

4.68 to 4.99 D-

5.00 to 5.33 D-/F

5.34 to 6.00 F

34 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Table 4
Handy Ride Customer Satisfaction Report Card and Mean Satisfaction Ratings (Years 2022, 2018, 2014, and 2011)
Service Characteristic
2022 2018 2014 2011
Grade Mean Grade Mean Grade Mean Grade Mean
Overall Service Provided by Handy
Ride A- 1.81 A- 1.73 A- 1.75 A- 1.75

Drivers' Traffic Safety Consciousness A 1.56 A 1.45 A 1.40 A 1.40 Drivers' Driving Skills A 1.60 A 1.57 A 1.39 A 1.39
Reservation Staff's Implementation
of COVID Screening A 1.64
Drivers' Enforcement of COVID
Procedures A 1.64
Value Provided for Price A 1.65 A 1.58 A 1.62 A 1.62
Cleanliness Inside Handy Ride
Vehicles A- 1.70 A 1.53 A 1.46 A 1.46
Reservation Staff's Courtesy A- 1.74 A 1.62 A 1.52 A 1.52 Drivers' Courtesy A- 1.76 A 1.52 A 1.39 A 1.39
Reservation Policy--Reserve 1-2
Days in Advance A- 1.82 A- 1.95 A- 1.68 A- 1.68
Service Hours A- 1.84 A- 1.72 A- 1.81 A- 1.81
Reservation Hours A- 1.84 A- 1.88 A- 1.85 A- 1.85
Availability of Handy Ride
Information A- 1.88 A- 1.76 A- 1.72 A- 1.72
Reservation Staff's Accuracy A- 1.94 A- 1.86 A- 1.86 A- 1.86 Overall Comfort of Van or Sedan A- 1.98 A- 1.72 A 1.63 A 1.63 On-Time to Home or Destination B+ 2.12 B+ 2.07 B+ 2.23 A- 1.89 Locations/Methods of Payment B+ 2.18
Scheduled Pickups B+ 2.22 B+ 2.25 B+ 2.09 B+ 2.09
Will-Call Pickups B 2.41 B 2.51 B 2.57 B+ 2.18

35 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Feeling of Safety On-Board Handy Ride Vehicles: It is apparent that Handy Ride customers feel quite safe on Handy Ride vehicles (Chart 14) and this feeling enters into the satisfaction and importance features in this section of the report . Specifically, 98 percent of customers feel either very safe (81 percent) or somewhat safe (17 percent). This is consistent with the results of the 2018, 2014, 2011 surveys where, once again, nearly everyone (99 percent in 2018, 98 percent in 2014 and 99 percent in 2011) indicated they felt either very safe or somewhat safe.

Handy Ride Time-Related Considerations

Trip Duration: The typical Handy Ride trip is 34.0 minutes (mean) and 30 minutes (median) (Chart 15).

The Handy Ride trip for 7 in 10 customers (70 percent) is 30 minutes or less. This is very consistent with the results of the 2018, 2014 and 2011 surveys where 71 percent, 72 percent, and 70 percent respectively had a typical trip last 30 minutes or less. In previous survey periods, the typical trip duration was 30 minutes or less for a greater percentage of custo mers. For example, in 2004, 83 percent rode a typical trip of 30 minutes or less and in 2007, 90 percent rode a typical trip of 30 minutes or less. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Very Safe Somewhat Safe Somewhat Unsafe Very Unsafe
81%
17%
2% 0%
84%
15%
1% 0%
81%
17%
2% 0%
83%
16%
1% 0%
Chart 14
How Safe Does Customer Feel On-Board Handy Ride
Vehicles?
2022
2018
2014
2011

36 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Will-Call Pickup Times: Will-call pickups occur when customers are not certain in advance when to be picked up at their destination. Return trips from their destinations are not prescheduled and the customer is picked up before 90 minutes from the time he or she calls. Chart 16 shows the typical wait times for a will-call pickup. It is noteworthy that in the current survey, the mean wait time of 39.8 minutes and the median wait time of 30 minutes are considerably less than the maximum wait time guideline of 90 minutes allowed for will-call pickups. In fact, nearly three in five respondents (57 percent) waited for a will -call pickup 30 minutes or less. The se typical wait times in 20 22 are consistent with the findings in 2014 and 2018 where 53 percent and 59 percent of customers, respectively, had wait times of 30 minutes or less .

There was a small decline in this percentage from 2011, where nearly 7 in 10 (69 percent) of the respondents had typical will-call wait times of 30 minute or less.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
30 minutes or less 31-to-60 minutes 61-to-90 minutes More than 90 minutes 70%
25%
3% 2%
71%
21%
5% 3%
72%
27%
1% 0%
70%
26%
2% 2%
Chart 15
Typical Trip Duration
2022: mean = 34.0 minutes--median = 30 minutes
2018: mean = 32.9 minutes--median = 30 minutes
2014: mean = 28.4 minutes--median = 25 minutes
2022
2018
2014
2011

37 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Chart 17 indicates that in 20 22 just over one-half (51 percent) of customers never waited more than 90 minutes for a will-call pickup. This finding is statistically consistent with the 2018 survey period where 56 percent of respondents never waited for a will-call pick for more than 90 minutes. The current wait time (51 percent of respondents never having to wait for more than 90 minutes) is also consistent with the 2014 and 2011 survey periods – 47 percent never waited for more than 90 minutes in 2014 and 51 percent never waited longer than 90 minutes in 201 1. There is, however, a noticeable decline in service represented by the percentage of customers who waited 3 or more times for a will-call pickup. In 2018, only 11 percent waited over 90 minutes on 3 or more occasions, while in the current year (2022), 20 percent of respondents waited 3 or more times for a will-call pickup.

Chart 18 indicates that the mean longest wait time for a will -call pickup is 73.9 minutes, and the longest median wait time is 60 minutes – both averages are below the 90-minute maximum that has been established as a guideline. This service level is consistent with the 2018 survey results where the mean longest wait time was 73.1 minutes and the median longest wait time was also 60 minutes. The wait times in 2022 and 2018 represent a considerable improvement over the 2014 survey period where the longest mean wait time was 82.9 minutes with a median of 80 minutes. In both the current year (2022) and in 2018, 25 percent of 0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
10 minutes
or less
11-20
minutes
21-30
minutes
31-40
minutes
41-60
minutes
61-80
minutes
81-100
minutes
More than
100 minutes
13%
18%
26%
5%
25%
8%
1%
4%
15%
19%
25%
6%
24%
2% 1%
3%
9%
17%
27%
7%
15% 15%
7%
3%
15%
24%
30%
12%
9%
3%
5%
2%
Chart 16
Typical Wait for Will-Call Pickup
2022: mean = 39.8 minutes--median = 30 minutes
2018: mean = 38.1 minutes--median = 30 minutes
2014: mean = 41.5 minutes--median = 30 minutes
2022
2018
2014
2011
30 minutes or less:
2022 = 57%
2018 = 59%
2014 = 53%
2011 = 69%

38 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
respondents have, at some time , waited more than 90 m inutes for a will-call pickup – a substantial improvement from 2014 where 36 percent waited more than 90 minutes.

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Yes-3 or more times Yes-once or twice No-never have
20%
29%
51%
11%
33%
56%
17%
36%
47%
11%
38%
51%
Chart 17
Ever Waited Over 90 Minutes for Will-Call Pickup
2022
2018
2014
2011
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
30 minutes or less 31-to-60 minutes 61-to-90 minutes More than 90 minutes 31%
26%
18%
25%
31%
24%
20%
25%
23% 23%
18%
36%
42%
27%
11%
20%
Chart 18
Longest Will-Call Pickup Wait
2022: mean = 73.9 minutes--median = 60 minutes
2018: mean = 73.1 minutes--median = 60 minutes
2014: mean = 82.9 minutes--median = 80 minutes
2022
2018
2014
2011

39 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Scheduled Pickups: The guideline for a scheduled pickup is no more than 5 minutes before and no more than 30 minutes after the scheduled pickup. In 2022, the scheduled mean typical pickup time is 23.8 minutes, and the median pickup time is 20 minutes (Chart 19). Both averages are well within the window established for such scheduled pickups. In the current survey, 84 percent were picked up in 30 minutes or less. This is consistent with the 2018, 2014, 2011, and 2007 survey periods where 86 percent, 90 percent, 87 percent, and 92 percent of customers, respectively, were picked up within 30 minutes of their scheduled pick-up time. These typical pick-up times since 2007 represent a considerable improvement over the 2004 survey period, where only 64 percent were picked up within the established 30-minute window.

Chart 20 indicates that more than two in five (42 percent) of customers never waited more than 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup. This finding is consistent with the 2018 and 2011 results – in 2018, 40 percent of customers never waited more than 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup and in 2011, 42 percent never waited more than 30 minutes. However, the results in 2014 are notably different from the other 3 survey periods in that only one third of customers never had to wait more than 30 minutes for a scheduled pickup.

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
10 minutes or
less
11-20 minutes 21-30 minutes 31-40 minutes 41-60 minutes 61 minutes or more
27%
33%
24%
3%
11%
2%
26%
33%
27%
4%
8%
2%
32% 32%
26%
3%
6%
1%
24%
39%
24%
4%
7%
2%
Chart 19
Typical Scheduled Pickup Wait Time
2022: mean = 23.8 minutes--median = 20 minutes
2018: mean = 22.7 minutes--median = 20 minutes
2014: mean = 18.9 minutes--median = 15 minutes
2022
2018
2014
2011
30 minutes or less:
2022 = 84%
2018 = 86%
2014 = 90%
2011 = 87%

40 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

The longest pickup wait time for a scheduled pickup is depicted in Chart 21. The mean longest wait for a scheduled pickup in 2022 is 41.5 minutes and the median is 30 minutes. This finding is consistent with the 2018 result where the longest scheduled pickup wait was 41.4 minutes. The longest scheduled wait times in 2018 and 2022 represent a considerable improvement over the result in the 2014 survey where the mean wait time was 49.5 minutes and the median wait time was 45 minutes. Further, nearly 9 in 10 respondents (86 percent) experienced their longest wait time to be 60 minutes or less. This result is consistent with the 2018 finding where 89 percent of respondents experienced wait times of 60 minutes or less. The results for 2022 and 2018 show a minor improvement over the 2014 and 2011 wait times and a more substantial improvement over the 2007 and 2004 survey periods. In 2014, 80 percent experienced their longest wait time to be 60 minutes or less. Similarly, other results are as follows: 2011 (82 percent), 2007 (77 percent), and 2004 (71 percent).

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Yes-3 or more times Yes-once or twice No-never have
28%
30%
42%
26%
34%
40%
31%
36%
33%
14%
44%
42%
Chart 20
Ever Waited Over 30 Minutes for a Scheduled Pick-Up
2022
2018
2014
2011

41 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Other Time-Related Considerations: Chart 22 reveals that one-fifth (20 percent) of customers always allow a 2-hour window between their requested pickup time and their scheduled appointment with another 38 percent sometimes allowing a two-hour window. One-third (33 percent) are more likely to allow one hour or less. In 2018, one-fourth (25 percent) always allowed a two-hour window between their requested pickup time and their scheduled appointment with another 25 percen t sometimes allowing a two - hour window; however, in 2018, it is notable that nearly one-half (47 percent) of respondents were more likely to allow a window of one hour or less.

In 2014, respondents were similarly likely to allow a 1-hour window or less ( 49 percent), but 2 014 respondents were more likely to always allow a 2-hour window (33 percent). In 2011, 43 percent always allowed a 2-hour window. Further, in 2011, only 33 percent allowed a 1-hour window or less. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
30 minutes or less 31-to-60 minutes 61-to-90 minutes More than 90 minutes 54%
32%
8% 6%
50%
39%
7%
4%
36%
44%
14%
6%
49%
33%
9% 9%
Chart 21
Longest Scheduled Pickup Wait
2022: mean = 41.5 minutes--median = 30 minutes
2018: mean = 41.4 minutes--median = 32 minutes
2014: mean = 49.5 minutes--median = 45 minutes
2022
2018
2014
2011

42 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Chart 23 shows that over one-half (52 percent) of Handy ride customers indicate that a Handy Ride vehicle has never arrived early for pickup. The finding in 2018 is similar in that 49 percent of customers never experienced a Handy Ride vehicle arriving early. In the 2011 and 2014 surveys, however, the findings are different and more favorable -- 30 percent and 42 percent of customers, respectively, had never experienced a Handy Ride vehicle arriving early for pickup. In 2007, 31 percent of customers experienced an early pickup. From another perspective , only one third (33 percent) of customers in the current survey experienced early pickup once or twice and this is similar to the findings in 2018 and 2014 where 40 percent of customers in each year experienced an early pickup. This compares to over one -half encountering this situation in 2007 (55 percent) and 2011 (51 percent).
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Yes, always 2 hours
Yes, sometimes 2 hours
No, less than 1 hour
No, 1 hour
No, >1 and <2 hours
No, more than 2 hours
No, let reservation staff set
window
Other (mostly "don't know")
20%
38%
2%
31%
2%
0%
3%
4%
25%
25%
5%
42%
2%
0%
1%
33%
6%
6%
43%
7%
1%
4%
43%
20%
0%
33%
2%
0%
2%
Chart 22
Allow Two Hour Window Between Requested Pickup Time
and Scheduled Appointment?
2022
2018
2014
2011

43 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Chart 24 indicates that over three-fourths (77 percent) of respondents would find a call helpful reminding them of their appointment. Among these respondents, 27 percent would find it helpful to have two calls— one on the night before their trip and another on the day of their trip ; 21 percent would want a call on the same day only and another 29 percent on the night before only. There is a much stronger interest in 2022 than there was in 201 8 and 2014 regarding such a reminder call. This finding is substantiated by noting that in 2014, over two fifth s of respondents (42 percent) indicated that they would not find any reminder call helpful and in 201 8, 28 percent voiced this opinion. In the current survey, less than one -fourth (23 percent) feel that a call would not be helpful.

Chart 25 indicates that 80 percent of respondents are aware that repeated no -shows can result in a suspension of service. Conversely, 20 percent are not aware of this possibility.

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Yes-3 or more times Yes-once or twice No-never have
15%
33%
52%
11%
40%
49%
18%
40%
42%
19%
51%
30%
Chart 23
Has Handy Ride Vehicle Ever Arrived Early for Pickup?
2022
2018
2014
2011

44 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Night Before and Same
Day
Night Before Only Same Day Only Neither Would be
Helpful
27%
29%
21%
23%
26%
23% 23%
28%
19%
25%
14%
42%
Chart 24
Would Reminder Call Be Helpful?
2022
2018
2014
Aware of Suspension
Possibility, 80%
Not Aware of
Suspension Possibility,
20%
Chart 25
Aware that Repeated No-Shows Can Result in Suspension of Service

45 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Method of Fare Payment and Electronic Technology
Chart 26 indicates that customers largely use cash to pay their Handy Ride fare and that this has been the case since 2004. In the current survey, approximately three-fourths (74 percent) pay their fare with cash.

In previous survey periods, the percentages of customers who pay cash are as follows: 2004 –76 percent; 2007 – 72 percent, 2011 – 71 percent, 2014 – 77 percent, and 2018 – 76 percent. The alternative method of fare payment is the Handy Ride Pass (26 percent in 2022, 24 percent in 2018, 23 percent in 2014 and 29 percent in 2011).
▪ Customers who are retired (85 percent) and disabled (79 percent) normally pay their fare with cash while those who are employed full time (7 3 percent) and individuals who are self -employed (67 percent) normally use the Handy Ride Pass to pay their fare. ▪ Customers who do not consider themselves to have limited English proficiency normally pay their fare with cash (78 percent) while those who feel they have a lack of English proficiency are more likely to pay with a pass (64 percent).
▪ Females tend to pay their fare using cash (78 percent); males (66 percent).

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Cash Handy Ride Pass
74%
26%
76%
24%
77%
23%
71%
29%
Chart 26
Method of Fare Payment
2022
2018
2014
2011

46 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
The availability and use of a smart phone is shown in Chart 27. Nearly three-fifths of respondents (58 percent) indicate that they have the use of a smart phone. This represents a slight increase in the use of a smart phone since the 2018 survey where 55 percent indicated that they used a smart phone. However, the results in 2022 and 2018 represent a con siderable increase in the use of Smart phones from the 2014 and 2011 surveys – 2014 (24 percent used smart phones) and in 2011 (10 percent used smart phones). In the current year (2022), nearly two -thirds (66 percent) of Smart Phone users would use a mobil e app for reservations if such an App were available.
▪ As suspected, younger customers are more likely to use a smart phone (18-54 = 70 percent) versus older customers (over the age of 55 = 49 percent).

Chart 28 shows that among those respondents who use the Internet at least once per week (58 percent), 40 percent have visited the FAX website. Among those respondents who do not use the Internet at least once per week (42 percent), 15 percent have visited the FAX website. In general, 30 percent of all respondents have visited the FAX website. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Yes No
58%
42%
55%
45%
24%
76%
10%
90%
Chart 27
Use Smart Phone?
2022
2018
2014
2011
2022: 66% of Smart Phone Users Would
Use Mobile App for Reservations, if Available

47 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
▪ Customers who visited the FAX website indicated that pick-ups on time are an important factor in determining their level of satisfaction with Handy Ride (49 percent), as opposed those who never visited the FAX website (35 percent).

Use of FAX Fixed Route Bus and Exclusive Reliance on Handy Ride Chart 29 shows that 71 percent of Handy Ride customers either strongly agree (3 8 percent) or agree (33 percent) that they are totally dependent upon Handy Ride for their transportation needs. This represents an increase in Handy Ride dependency since 2018 where 65 percent either strongly agreed or agreed that they were totally dependent on Handy Ride. The 201 4 level of agreement regarding Handy Ride dependency was 70 percent, and in 2011, the level of dependency was 64 percent.

Use Internet at Least
Once per Week, 58%
Do Not Use Internet at
Least Once per Week,
42%
Chart 28
Use Internet at Least Once per Week/Visited FAX Website 40% of Weekly Internet Users have visited FAX Website
15% of Non-Weekly Internet Users have visited FAX Website 30% of all Respondents have visited FAXWebsite

48 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Strongly Agree
Agree
Sllightly Agree
Slightly Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
38%
33%
11%
7%
6%
5%
33%
32%
13%
10%
7%
5%
45%
25%
14%
7%
6%
3%
44%
20%
19%
9%
6%
2%
Chart 29
Totally Depend Upon Handy Ride for Transportation
Needs
2022
2018
2014
2011

49 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Chart 30 indicates that two in five (40 percent) customers in the current year occasionally ride a FAX fixed-route bus. This result is identical with the finding from the 2018 survey. Both the 2022 and the 2018 survey findings represent a considerable increase in the use of the fixed-route bus over the 2014 and 2011 survey periods (32 percent usage in 2014 and only 18 percent usage in 2011).

Chart 31 shows that nearly one-fifth (19 percent) of those who have occasionally used the fixed-route bus did so because it is convenient to use such a bus to travel to a nearby destination. This reason is followed by the need to make a last-minute trip and did not have time to make a Handy Ride reservation (17 percent), the ability to travel to places not served by Handy Ride (15 percent), and to take advantage of the faster bus trip (9 percent).

In 2018, the top reasons why Handy Ride customers used the fixed buses were the same but in different proportions--convenience to use such a bus to travel to a nearby destination (25 percent), the need to make a last-minute trip (22 percent), the ability to gain access to destinations not served by Handy Ride (12 percent), and the inability of Handy Ride customers to obtain a reservation (7 percent). The 2014 survey had far fewer respondents indicating that the bus allowed them to access destinations not served by Handy Ride and substantially more indicating that a faster bus trip induced them to use the bus. 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Yes No
40%
60%
40%
60%
32%
68%
18%
82%
Chart 30
Occasionally Ride FAX Fixed-Route Bus?
2022
2018
2014
2011

50 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
19%
17%
15%
12%
9%
3%
2% 2%
1%
25%
22%
12%
7%
6%
5%
4% 4%
8%
5%
18%
24%
3%
13%
15%
10%
8%
4%
Chart 31
Reason for Supplementing Handy Ride with FAX Fixed
Route Buses
(Among 40% Who Sometimes Ride FAX Bus)
2022
2018
2014
2011: Untallied respones
included more convenient,
flexible, no need to wait
for pick up--also time/route
not available, less expensive,
did not have reservation

51 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
There is an increasing interest in the possibility of using FAX wheelchair accessible buses. Nearly two- fifths (37 percent) of 2022 Handy Ride customers would consider using wheelchair accessible buses if FAX provided free training (Chart 32). This represents a slight increase over the 2018 survey results where 33 percent would consider using wheelchair accessible buses. In 2014 and 2011, there was considerably less interest in wheelchair accessible buses. In 2014, 18 percent of Handy ride customers cons idered using wheelchair accessible buses and in 2011, only 10 percent entertained this option.

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Yes No
37%
63%
33%
67%
18%
82%
10%
90%
Chart 32
Consider Using FAX Wheelchair Accessible Buses
if FAX Provided Free Training?
(among 60% who do not use FAX Buses)
2022
2018
2014
2011

52 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Covid Protocols
Quite obviously, COVID has impacted the lives of everyone and has had an effect upon travel. Chart 33 shows that, during Covid, nearly two -fifths (38 percent) of respondents took fewer Handy Ride trips.

Another 10 percent took more trips and over one -third (33 percent) made no changes in the number of Handy Ride trips taken during Covid. Nearly one -fifth (18 percent) did not use H andy Ride at all during Covid.

Chart 34 indicates that among those who used Handy Ride during COVID (82 percent), over three-fifths (61 percent) used Handy Ride for medical/dental trips. Another 13 percent used Handy Ride for shopping trips, with social/recreation (7 percent), Work/Business (6 percent), and Errands/Personal (6 percent) following in order.

Chart 35 reports that among the 56 percent of respondents who took fewer trips or no trips at all on Handy Ride during COVID, these respondents handled their transportation needs in the following ways: obtained rides from family and friends (45 percent), stayed home more often (36 percent), used the FAX bus, medical transport, and their own car (12 percent), and used of Uber, Lyft, and taxis (6 percent).

Number of Trips Not
Changed, 34%
Did Not Use Handy
Ride, 18%
More Trips Taken, 10%
Fewer Trips Taken,
38%
Chart 33
Has the Number of Trips Taken Changed During COVID?

53 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
College
High/Middle/Elementary School
Work/Business
Shopping
Errands/Personal
Recreation/Social
Medical/Dental
Other
3%
3%
6%
13%
6%
7%
61%
1%
Chart 34
Trip Purpose Using Handy Ride During COVID
(Among 82% Who Used Handy Ride During COVID)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Uber/Lyft/Taxi
Friends/Family Drive
Stay Home More
Bus/Medical Transport/Have Car
GoGoGrandparent.com
Other
6%
45%
36%
12%
0%
1%
Chart 35
Alternative Transportation Mode During COVID
(Among 56% Who Took Fewer Trips or None at All on Handy Ride During COVID) 5% Medical/Dental--1% Shopping

54 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

APPENDIX

1. Questionnaire 55

2. Frequencies 67

3. Open Ended Responses 97

55 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Questionnaire

56 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Handy Ride Telephone Survey 2022

Hello, my name is ___________. I'm calling from ______________. We’re conducting a customer satisfaction survey on behalf of the FAX Handy Ride Paratransit service. FAX would like to have a better understanding of how you feel about their service. This interview will take approximately 10 -15 minutes. Your responses are co mpletely confidential, and all results will be reported in summarized form only.

Are you able to answer questions about the Handy Ride service? [IF NO, IS THERE SOMEONE THERE WHO CAN? (e.g. caretaker, family member, etc.]. Ask this other respondent for relationship to customer and confirm that she/he is familiar with Handy Ride and can respond about the customer’s opinion. Also make certain that actual customer is not able to respond himself/herself.

Could you take a few minutes right now to help us out with your opinions? [IF NO, ARRANGE CB]

IF ASKED FOR A CONTACT NAME:

Please call Richard Parker, Rea & Parker Research 858-279-5070.

IF TOLD "NO TIME"OR “BUSY RIGHT NOW”:

Could I schedule a more convenient time?

"LM":

This is... calling from_______________. It's..(DATE and TIME). We’re conducting a customer satisfaction survey on behalf of the FAX Handy Ride service. We’ll try again another time. Thank you.

"LM":

This is...calling from____________________. We’ve been trying to reach you for a few days regarding our customer satisfaction survey on behalf of the FAX Handy Ride service.

Could you please call us at __________ and leave a message with the best times to reach you? Thank you.

RESP: We would like to know with whom we are speaking, Are you…?

1. ______ HANDY RIDE CUSTOMER

2. ______ CARE GIVER/NURSE

3. ______ FRIEND/RELATIVE

4. ______ OTHER, SPECIFY________________________________

NOTE: SURVEY QUESTIONS TO CUSTOMER WILL USE “YOU” IN QUESTION IF RESPONDENT IS CUSTOMER. OTHERWISE, REFER TO CUSTOMER BY NAME AS MR.________ or MS. _________.

57 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Q1. How many one-way trips via Handy Ride (for example, if you take a round trip, that would be counted as two trips) do(es) you/NAME take in a typical week? ______________ (99 = DK/REF)

Q2. How long have (has) you/NAME been using Handy Ride?

1. LESS THAN THREE MONTHS

2. 3 TO 6 MONTHS

3. 7 MONTHS TO 11 MONTHS

4. ONE TO 1.5 YEARS

5. MORE THAN 1.5 YEARS BUT UNDER 3 YEARS

6. 3 YEARS OR MORE

7. DK—DO NOT READ

Q3. When you/NAME use(s) Handy Ride, what is the most common purpose of your/NAME’S trip?

1. TO / FROM WORK

2. TO / FROM SCHOOL

3. TO / FROM SHOPPING

4. TO/ FROM APPOINTMENTS (E.G., MEDICAL / DENTIST, ETC.)

5. RUN ERRANDS/PAY BILLS

6. ENTERTAINMENT/DINING

7. CHURCH/TEMPLE/MOSQUE/SYNAGOGUE

8. VISITING FRIENDS / RELATIVES

9. OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) ……….

10. DK—DO NOT READ

Q4. When was your/NAME’S most recent trip using Handy Ride?

1. Within the last two weeks

2. More than 2 weeks ago but more recent than one month ago

3. One-to-Three Months ago

4. More than 3 Months ago (GO TO Q4a)

5. CAN'T REMEMBER / DON'T KNOW—DO NOT READ

Q4a. (IF Q4 = 4—IF OTHERWISE, GO TO Q5) Why have you not used Handy Ride during the past three months? — (PRESS FOR MORE DETAIL IF THE RESPONDENT SAYS, “JUST HAVEN’T NEEDED
IT” OR SOMETHING SIMILAR)
______________________________________________________________

58 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Q5. How much do(es) you/NAME agree or disagree with this statement: “I/NAME totally depend(s) on Handy Ride for all my/his or her transportation needs”?

1. STRONGLY AGREE

2. AGREE

3. SLIGHTLY AGREE

4. SLIGHTLY DISAGREE

5. DISAGREE

6. STRONGLY DISAGREE

7. DON'T KNOW –DO NOT READ

Q6. Do(es) you/NAME plan to take more or fewer trips per week on Handy Ride in the next three months?

1. MORE TRIPS

2. FEWER TRIPS

3. SAME—NO CHANGE

4. WILL NOT USE HANDY RIDE

Q6a. (IF Q6 NOT = 1 ---IF Q6= 1, GO TO Q7). Please explain why you/NAME are/is not planning to use Handy Ride more than you do now. ________________________________________________

Q7. Did COVID change the number of weekly trips you/NAME have/has taken using Handy Ride?

1. ____I have not changed my usage of Handy Ride during COVID

2. ____I have not used Handy Ride during COVID (GO TO Q7b)

3. ____I take more trips using Handy Ride during COVID

4. ____I take fewer trips using Handy Ride during COVID

Q7a. (IF Q7 =1 OR Q7 = 3 OR Q7 = 4) If you/NAME used Handy Ride during COVID, what was your most common trip purpose? (CHECK ONLY ONE)

1. ____College 5. ____Errands/Personal

2. ____High/Middle/Elementary School 6. ____Recreational/Social

3. ____Work/Business 7. ____Medical/Dental

4. ____Shopping 8. ____Other, please specify
________________________________

59 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Q7b. (IF Q7 =2 OR Q7 = 4--—IF OTHERWISE, GO TO Q7c) If you/NAME have taken fewer Handy Ride trips during COVID, what means of travel have you been using?

1. ___Uber/Lyft/Taxi (GO TO Q7c)

2. ___Friends or family drive

3.____I stay home more

4.____GoGoGrandparent.com

5. ___Other, please specify __________________________

Q7c. (IF Q7b = 1—IF OTHERWISE, GO TO Q8) If you/NAME used Uber or Lyft or a taxi instead of Handy Ride during COVID, what was your typical trip purpose? (CHECK ONLY ONE)

1. ____College 5. ____Errands/Personal

2. ____High/Middle/Elementary School 6. ____Recreational/Social

3. ____Work/Business 7. ____Medical/Dental

4. ____Shopping 8. ____Other, please specify
________________________________

Q8. Based on your/NAME’s ridership experience, and on a scale of 1-to-6, with 1 being VERY SATISFIED, 2 SATISFIED, 3 SLIGHTLY SATISFIED, 4 SLIGHTLY DISSATISFIED, 5 DISSATISFIED and 6 being VERY DISSATISFIED, how satisfied, or dissatisfied are(is) you/NAME with Handy Ride in getting you/NAME home or to your/NAME’S destination on time? Again 1 is VERY SATISFIED and 6 is VERY DISSATISFIED __________
(7= DON’T KNOW—DO NOT READ)

60 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Q9a-q. I am now going to ask you/NAME to rate a series of other Handy Ride features that you/NAME have (has) likely experienced as a customer of Handy Ride.

We’ll use that same 1-to-6 scale, again where 1 is VERY SATISFIED and 6 is VERY DISSATISFIED.

Feature 1 2 3 4 5 6
7= DK
Do Not
Read
Handy Ride’s Scheduled Pick-Ups? (Within 30 minutes
after your scheduled pick-up time)

Handy Ride’s “Will-Call-Pick-Ups”? (customer is not
certain when to be picked up, so return trips are not
prescheduled and the customer is picked up to 90
minutes from the time he or she calls to be picked-up,
medical trips only)

Cleanliness inside Handy Ride vehicles
Drivers’ courtesy
Drivers’ driving skills
Drivers’ enforcement of COVID safety procedures, such
as wearing masks and conducting a COVID screening

Drivers’ traffic-safety consciousness
The overall comfort of the rides
Handy Ride reservations staff’s accuracy (i.e., they get the correct time and location)

Handy Ride reservations staff’s courtesy
Handy Ride reservations staff’s implementation of COVID protocols, such as conducting a COVID health screening

Handy Ride’s Monday to Sunday “8 AM to 5 PM”
reservation hours

Handy Ride’s reservation policy where you can reserve
your ride 1 to 2 days before your trip

Handy Ride service hours
Value provided by Handy Ride for the fare/price paid
Locations and payment methods to purchase passes
Availability of information on Handy Ride provided by
FAX

Overall service provided by FAX’s Handy Ride

61 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Q10a-b. You/NAME may have considered several factors when thinking about your/NAME’S level of satisfaction with Handy Ride service. What would be the two most important factors that impact your/NAME’S level of satisfaction?

DO NOT READ—CODE USING THE FOLLOWING SCHEMA

1. COVID-RELATED SAFETY on the VEHICLE

2. SAFETY IN TRAFFIC

3. DRIVERS' DRIVING SKILLS

4. DRIVERS' CUSTOMER SERVICE

5. RESERVATION STAFF'S ACCURACY

6. RESERVATION STAFF'S CUSTOMER SERVICE

7. PICK-UPS BEING ON TIME

8. WAIT TIME FOR PICK-UPS

9. CLEANLINESS INSIDE THE VEHICLE

10. REASONABLE FARE / PRICE of MONTHLY PASS

11. HANDY RIDE'S RESERVATION HOURS

12. HANDY RIDE'S HOURS OF OPERATION / SERVICE

13. HOW CIVIL or COURTEOUS are the OTHER RIDERS IN THE

VEHICLE

14. COMFORT LEVEL of the RIDE

15. TYPE OF VEHICLE USED - BUS, SEDAN

20. OTHER. please specify___________________________

25. DON'T KNOW—DO NOT READ

Q11. How safe do(es) you/NAME feel in Handy Ride vehicles?

1. VERY SAFE

2. SOMEWHAT SAFE

3. SOMEWHAT UNSAFE

4. VERY UNSAFE

5. DON'T KNOW [DO NOT READ]

Q12. Have (Has) you/NAME ever waited over 90 minutes (for a Handy Ride “Will-Call- Pick-Up”)?

1. YES, ON THREE OR MORE OCCASSIONS

2. YES, ONCE OR TWICE

3. NO, NEVER HAVE

4. DON'T KNOW / CAN'T RECALL—DO NOT READ

Q13. How long was your/NAMES’S longest wait from the time of your call for a Handy Ride Will Call Pickup to arrive? ____________ mins. (999 = DON’T KNOW—

DO NOT READ)

62 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Q14. How long has your/NAME typical wait been for a “Will-Call-Pick-Up” to arrive?________ (999 = DK—DO NOT READ) mins.

Q15. Have (Has) you/NAME waited over 30 minutes for a Handy Ride Scheduled pick- up?

1. YES, ON THREE OR MORE OCCASSIONS

2. YES, ONCE OR TWICE

3. NO, NEVER HAVE

4. DON'T KNOW / CAN'T RECALL

Q16. How long was your/NAME’S longest wait for your Scheduled pick-up? _________ (999=DK—DO NOT READ) mins.

Q17. How long has your/NAME’S typical wait been for a Handy Ride Scheduled pick- up?
_______ (999 = DK—DO NOT READ) mins.

Q18. What has been the typical duration of your/NAMES’S rides each way (i.e., the time you are on board a Handy Ride vehicle; not the wait time)? ___________ (999 = DK—DO NOT READ) mins

Q19. Do(es) you/NAME usually allow a 2-hour window between your/NAME’S requested pick-up time and your/NAME’S appointment time (i.e., the time you/NAME need(s) to be at a particular place)?

1. YES, ALWAYS 2 HOURS

2. YES, SOMETIMES

3. NO, USUALLY ALLOW A 1-HOUR WINDOW

4. OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) _______

Q20. Have (Has) you/NAME encountered occasions where Handy Ride arrived to pick you/NAME up earlier than you/NAME anticipated?

1. YES, ON THREE OR MORE OCCASSIONS

2. YES, ONCE OR TWICE

3. NO, NEVER HAVE

4. DON'T KNOW / CAN'T RECALL

Q21. Would you/NAME find it helpful to receive a reminder notification on the night before or on the same day for trips scheduled on Handy Ride?

1. YES, both the night before and on the same day

2. YES, night before only

3. YES, same day only

4. NEITHER WOULD BE HELPFUL

63 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Q22. How do(es) you/NAME normally pay your fare?

1. Cash

2. Handy Ride Pass

3. DK—DO NOT READ

Q23. Do(es) you/NAME occasionally ride FAX fixed-route bus?

1. YES

2. NO---(GO TO 23b)

3. DK [DO NOT READ]

Q23a. (IF Q23 =1—IF OTHERWISE, GO TO Q23b) What was/were your/NAME’S reason(s) for supplementing your/NAME’S transportation needs with FAX fixed - route buses?
___________________________________________________________

Q23b. Would you/NAME consider using FAX’s fixed route buses, which are all accessible, if you/NAME could access a free travel training program to learn how to use these buses?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK/REF—DO NOT READ

Q24. Have (Has) you/NAME ever visited the FAX or Handy Ride website to obtain information about transportation services?

1. YES

2. NO

3. DK—DO NOT READ

Q25. Do(es) you/NAME use a smart phone or mobile applications?

1. YES

2. NO

3. DK—DO NOT READ

64 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
Q25a. (IF Q25 = 1 —IF OTHERWISE, GO TO Q26) If Handy Ride had a mobile app, would you use it to make your reservations?

1. YES

2. NO

3. DK—DO NOT READ

Q26. Do(es) you/NAME use the Internet at least once a week?

1. YES

2. NO

3. DK—DO NOT READ

Q27. Are you aware that repeated No-Shows can result in your service being suspended?

1. YES

2. NO—

3. DK—DO NOT READ

DEMOGRAPHICS
To ensure that we are talking to a wide variety of riders, we would like to ask you a few more questions. First, …

MILITARY STATUS Are you/NAME active-duty military or a U.S. Veteran?

1. ___ Yes

2. ___ No

3. ___ DON’T KNOW—DO NOT READ

WORK What is your/NAME’S work status? Are you/Is NAME….?

1. EMPLOYED FULL-TIME BY A THIRD PARTY (i.e. SOMEONE OR

SOME BUSINESS OR AGENCY)

2. EMPLOYED PART TIME BY A THIRD PARTY

3. SELF EMPLOYED

4. STUDENT AND EMPLOYED

5. STUDENT AND NOT EMPLOYED

6. HOMEMAKER

7. RETIRED

8. UNEMPLOYED

9. DISABLED AND UNABLE TO WORK

12. OTHER, Specify_____________________

15. DK/REFUSED—DO NOT READ

65 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
AGE Which of the following age categories best describes your/NAME’S current age?

1. UNDER 18 YEARS OLD

2. 18 TO 34 YEARS OLD

3. 35 TO 54 YEARS OLD

4. 55 TO 74 YEARS OLD

5. 75 OR OLDER

6. DK/REFUSED TO ANSWER—DO NOT READ

EDUCATION : What is the last grade in school you/NAME have/has completed?

1. LESS THAN 8TH GRADE EDUCATION

2. SOME HIGH SCHOOL

3. HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE

4. VOCATIONAL / TECHNICAL SCHOOL

5. COLLEGE GRADUATE

6. POST GRADUATE EDUCATION

7. DK/REFUSED TO ANSWER—DO NOT READ

ETHNICITY Which of the following most closely describes your/NAME’S ethnic background? (CHECK ONE)

1. HISPANIC

2. WHITE/CAUCASIAN

3. AFRICAN AMERICAN/BLACK

4. ASIAN/SOUTHEAST ASIAN (PLEASE SPECIFY NATIONAL ORIGIN OR ASIAN ETHNIC GROUP_____________________)

5. AMERICAN INDIAN

6. PACIFIC ISLANDER

7. MIDDLE EASTERNER

8. MIXED, PLEASE SPECIFY________________________________

12. OTHER, PLEASE SPECIFY ____________________________

16. DK/REFUSED TO ANSWER—DO NOT READ

LEP: Do you consider yourself/NAME to be limited in the English language?

1.____Yes 2.____No 3._____ DK—DO NOT READ

66 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022
LANGUAGE What is the primary language spoken in your/NAMES’s home?

1. ENGLISH

2. SPANISH OR SPANISH CREOLE

3. HMONG

4. PUNJABI

5. OTHER INDIC LANGUAGES

6. LAOTIAN

7. MON-KHMER, CAMBODIAN

8. CHINESE

9. ARABIC

10. VIETNAMESE

11. ARMENIAN

12. TAGALOG

15. OTHER, _____________________________

20. DK/REFUSED TO ANSWER—DO NOT READ

INCOME Which of the following categories best describes your/NAME’s total household income in 2021, before taxes?

1. LESS THAN $10,000 PER YEAR

2. $10,000 TO $19,999 PER YEAR

3. $20,000 TO $29,999 PER YEAR

4. $30,000 TO $39,999 PER YEAR

5. $40,000 TO $49,999 PER YEAR

6. $50,000 OR MORE

7. DK/REFUSED TO ANSWER—DO NOT READ

ZIP What is your residential zip code? ___________________ (DK=00000----- DO

NOT READ)

GENDER What is your/NAME’s gender?

1. _____ MALE

2. _____ FEMALE

3. _____ OTHER

4. ______REFUSED TO ANSWER—DO NOT READ

67 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Frequency Tables

68 2022 Handy Ride Telephone Satisfaction Survey Rea & Parker Research City of Fresno—Fresno Area Express (FAX) March 2022

Respondent
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Handy Ride Customer 235 92.5 92.5 92.5
Care Giver/Nurse 8 3.1 3.1 95.7
Friend/Relative 11 4.3 4.3 100.0
Total 254 100.0 100.0

Number of One-Way Trips per Week
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 0 11 4.3 4.7 4.7
1 29 11.4 12.5 17.2
2 73 28.7 31.5 48.7
3 17 6.7 7.3 56.0
4 40 15.7 17.2 73.3
5 6 2.4 2.6 75.9
6 25 9.8 10.8 86.6
7 1 .4 .4 87.1
8 10 3.9 4.3 91.4
10 15 5.9 6.5 97.8
11 1 .4 .4 98.3
12 1 .4 .4 98.7
14 1 .4 .4 99.1
16 1 .4 .4 99.6
20 1 .4 .4 100.0
Total 232 91.3 100.0
Missing Don't Know 22 8.7
Total 254 100.0