actually, madam, you cannot speak a second time. that is a separate item, ma'am. but thank you. thank you for sharing. chairman brinkman: if there are no other comments, we will close this item 15. we are going to move on to the service right now. which is, i am sorry, i have totally lost track. >> i recognize that we are waiting for the students to arrive from school, so we have promised that those items will be fast, items 11, 12, 13. the first and second quarters service standards.

11 and 12 is a presentation and discussion of the fiscal results, and item 13 is adopting the 2013-2014 service standards and milestones, and, madam chair, no members of the public have expressed an interest to address you on any of those matters. that afternoon. good afternoon, the chair -- good afternoon, chair brinkman. i will discuss the first and second quarters standards and propose the standards for the fiscal years to come. >> thank you, travis. my name is donny nelson. i am the principal at a school, and i believe this is the fifth quality review that i have had the privilege of coming forward to discuss with you.

this quality review has enabled us to really take a look at performance reporting for sfmta and eyunni in particular over one decade of service. the quality review as you know is an audit of the data collection and reporting methods. we analyze the performance reports that you receive on a quarterly basis, and we made recommendations for improvements on both the handling of data and the types of information provided to the public. i am proud to say that after working with sfmta for the last decade, we can find no major problems with the reporting and data, the collection of data at the agency. over the decade that i have been involved with this, i have seen a much greater level of detail and more accurate data. we have identified a couple of major changes to performance reporting that we think would be an excellent idea.

one is to switch from quarterly reporting to monthly reporting of a handful of major indicators. this is important so that management gets timely information and is able to react to it more quickly, and also because you can provide your riders with a report card. we have analyzing the on-time data and allow you the opportunity to measure bunching and gapping, which are the two things which are most annoying to your passengers and will give them a measure of something they can really relate to. without going into data, i know that you have had the opportunity to look at the review. reporting has improved significantly, and most of our previous recommendations have been reported. we found only slight discrepancy

is in a couple of reporting areas, and these were things that were relatively easily corrected. because the quality reviews are done in arrears, you have much more current data than what you are able to report, so i am not going to go over the performance information with you, but i will say that in fiscal year 2009 and 2010, u.d. received its best on- time performance in all of the years i have been doing performance reporting, and while this has fluctuated slightly since then, on-time performance remains high, and there is hope that it will continue to go higher, particularly as you implement the t.e.p. and the rail service declined sharply, partly due to changes in definition but also due to greater attention in that area.

on the other hand, we do know a significant rate of vacancy, and this really speaks to the need to focus on maintenance of the existing system. in all of the years that i have been a muni watcher and doing the quality reviews, what we know as the vacancy rate in it vacancy increases, the next time we take a look, we find that the time between mean failures has decreased -- has increased because we have not been able to do that, so we want to support that recommendation, as well. since the audit period in fiscal year 2011, and you will be getting a report today from travis on more current information, we find that operator absenteeism is down slightly. we find that between failures on the real side, it is continuing to improve.

-- on the rail side. in another area, it is very high, near 20%, but the number of customer complaints has fallen, and data that was not available at the time of the report is showing continued increases. we find that the number of trips that exceed capacity has increased in 2011. this is due to the overall increase in ridership but also shows the need for implementation of the t.e.p, particularly on the busiest routes. and another market is the highest we have noted in previous audits, and we know that you are paying attention to fare evasion as we move to outdoor boarding.

many recommendations are already being implemented, including the need to replace the quarterly reports with monthly reports, to report by service type, it again in keeping with the t.e.p, setting different expectations for different routes. to use the data more practically as a management tool, and i know that is being done more proactively direct the agency, and i mentioned we wanted to deal with bunching and gapping. this is a way that your customers experience the system, and we think this type of information will be very useful. we would like you to measure not only the percentage of hours of service that you provide but also the number of missed trips. this has proven to be a difficult thing for mta to count, but we know that these missed trips, especially with routes that have infrequent service, especially near and

dear to your ridership. and the ada complaint, 60 days. this will allow more time to do more research and adequately addressed these complaints, and also, to restore a measure of trading hours, which is something you had reported in the past but stopped reporting recently. we are also recommending that your report invasion rates, citation issues, and the number of contacts by mode so we can better understand where this invasion is a problem, and we can better use this as a tool for applying your enforcement tools. and that you report employee grievances by division. this was supposed to be reported but was not reported in the most recent year. we think that is important as a management tool to understand where employee grievances are surfacing, so in summary,

performance was mixed, but there was improvement in key areas of most interest to ridership, and we are making recommendations to make reporting more timely and relevant to your customers and useful as a management tool. i will be happy to take your questions either now or after a presentation by travis. chairman brinkman: thank you. questions? great. mr.? >> all right, we are going to move fast and furious here with the volume of information. i will speak briefly to some of the highlights of the first and second-quarter service standards for fiscal year 2012. if given the limited time, i will focus on some metrics and move on. fiscal years 2013 and 2014.

as always, with on-time performance is where we start. on a quarterly basis, this debt to to 72.1% in the first quarter but rose in the second. polite real performance increased significantly in the second quarter from under 65% to over 75%. the management center having longer hours has allowed us to improve efficiency. in addition, they are auditing individual lines on the one by one basis and looking at improvements in those routes. looking at several routes, before and afterwards, and one final note, one schedule was adjusted to allow for a labor. there is some good improvements to be seen there. in terms of scheduled service hours delivered, increasing from 96.2% the last fiscal year to 97.4% in the most recent

quarter. as you know, service delivery is directly linked to the number of operators available. the goal is greater than 98.5%. and last, great progress in reducing late pullouts. this also resulted in improvements in that area. these are at the lowest level since fiscal year 2009. those are just the top three. to keep it short and sweet, if that is all right with you. >> -- chair brinkman: short and sweet. >> i am mindful of your time and everyone else's time. and on we go into 2013 and 2014.

these are the service standards for the fiscal years to come. the recent transportation quality review and the developing process provided great opportunity to give a complete look at the service standards program. at the outset, we identified five key goals. first, we wanted to make sure the metrics were clearly linked to the strategic plan. we have identified a key performance indicator as well as other supporting. second, we really have been focused, as bonnie mentioned, on increasing the frequency and timeliness of reporting. in the past, we reported on a quarterly basis. but there has been a 38 to the or more delay in some cases. where possible, we will be going to monthly reporting and trying to get wherever possible a 15- day turnaround. for all involved. third, we took a look at the existing service standards report and asked ourselves, is this a metric that is important?

is it a useful metric? is this something that is easily digestible by the public? in some cases, we have some long key metrics that are not easy for folks to identify with. one is about gaps, because that is something that is very clear to people and very real. then we reviewed all of the recommendations and inc. those whenever possible. we really have an eye towards what we can establish an attorney to review these metrics on an ongoing basis and also do a better job of getting that information out to the public. in terms of some of the key changes, i will speak about the four goals in the strategic plan. the first goal is to create a safer transportation experience for everyone. we teamed existing standards with muni, customer perceptions, secure to complaints, and collisions and supplemented those with metrics regarding the safety of the taxicab experience.

things and bidding staff, -- things involving staff and missed workdays. mrs. per 100,000 miles to make sure the near consistent with the federal reporting standards. the second strategic goal, which is to make others the preferred means of travel. we have a whole host of exciting metrics to gauge our progress. first, to try to capture the customer satisfaction with transit services, taxi availability, the bicycle network, and the pedestrian environment. this will supplement our standard. this will allow us to track how our efforts are improving customer satisfaction and the longer-term goals of making those preferable. second, we are rounding out our mandate to more effectively pinpoint the opportunities for improvement and also see how we are doing going forward. we are supplementing the service

hours delivered and the late metrics with the bunching and gaps metric that i mentioned. we will be looking at that specifically and focusing on on- time performance. it is critical there. also, we will be looking at on- time departures from terminals, as well. we are also looking at measures to engage escalators and elevators, as that is key to the accessibility of our services, and also looking at how we're managing our parking inventory and increasing the availability of secure bicycle parking. the third goal is to improve the quality of life in san francisco. measures in this area track our progress towards improving reducing consumption, emissions, waste, as well as broader efforts to increase the positive impact on the economy. new metrics in this area included focus on our agency and our cities resource consumption, our effectiveness of the

building -- of delivering things on time and on scope. we will also be looking at reducing the structural deficit. and last, the fourth goal is to create a workplace that delivers an outstanding service. without good internal communication and improve employee accountability and also good relationships with our stakeholders, we cannot accomplish our first three goals. he metrics in this area are tied to more frequent employee satisfaction survey, planning and evaluation is for all agency employees, engaging r. stickle dissatisfaction. now, just to go back to bonnie's recommendations, and in the review of our performance, we did our best to include these in what you see here. there are a few examples where we will not be able to do this immediately. the rate of pole in, that will

take some time. one was to look at training hours and restoring that. from our perspective, these are not an outcome matter. that may not necessarily be tied to a reduction in collisions, so with the effectiveness of our training is service. but by and large, we are doing our best to incorporate the recommendations that they put forth. so, following any comments or concerns or suggestions, we certainly have a lot to tackle in the months to come. we started out as i mentioned to you, we ended up with about 70 metrics. it was a completely different direction than we originally intended. currently, we are in about winning the data metrics, working with folks to get that all cleaned up where necessary, and also identifying champion organizations that will be charged with driving improvement. we will add an internal review process and will be producing our first full monthly report

on july 2012 by mid august. we are embarking on a pretty significant expansion of the prior performance metrics. i am sure this will be a learning process along the way, and we will keep you informed throughout. that concludes my presentation on the progress metrics, and i would be happy to answer any questions you have at this time. >> if i may provide just when to add, someone rushing through the senate we could get to the more juicy topic at hand, but i do want to emphasize how important these service standards are, not so much the looking back but the looking forward, and i want to thank both ms. nelson and mr. fox or their efforts to keep this current and really make it more meaningful. when we adopted the strategic plan, one of the things that i know was your interest as well

as mine is that it be a document that we could use to hold ourselves accountable and that the public could use to hold us accountable, that it would not be a document that we celebrate and then put up on a shelf and forget about, but that we use it to drive the decisions when making everyday budget decisions, such as the one we are contemplating today, the policy decisions, and without specific metrics, such as the standards that are imposed and the improvements to them that the audit called for, we would not really have the specific means, so i know it is a little dry and a little rushed, but i think it is very important, whether we have much discussion now or later. we will certainly be bringing back our performance or our results, but based on these standards, and i think that is a big part of the accountability that we need to bring to the mta. chair brinkman: director hein

icke? director heinicke: i think the minister runs are great things to monitor and those metrics as opposed to the traditional ones which we saw today. >> i have given my direction to staff. we will see if they can respond to this. >> we will certainly be available for july 2012. >> part of what we are doing is we have to develop something. we are working from bass lines,

but we are aiming to have as much of this done as possible by july 1 and to have the reporting done it for the most part monthly so you are not seeing things six or nine months after the fact. we are trying to get the reporting back to for management but also for the board and the public much closer after each reporting period. director heinicke: i do not have any objections to that, but this makes me wonder whether we need to have a discussion at some point or get input at some point on what the metrics should be rather than just proceeding with 70 metrics, which seems like a burdensome thing to do. my suggestion at that would be at the very least to consult the c.a.c. and get their input and then maybe come back to us and give us a progress report or maybe discuss it at our next board retreat, but it seems to me that you guys a clearly understood the message, and i appreciate the work, and maybe

we need 11 followup discussion before we delve into hundreds of metrics, also giving time for the public comment, as well. >> i did get their feedback. i did not mean to overstate. some are new metrics. some of those are the annual basis. director heinicke: the point is to say that we recognize this, and the goal is not to have metrics reported as quickly as -- as frequently as humanly possible but as frequently as usable. that is the balance i was try to strike there, so i appreciated. we will look forward to july and see what happens. chair brinkman: do we have any public comment?

secretary boomer: we have won public comment. francisco. francisco, a directo. i was paying very careful attention to the presentation given by the gentleman. missing in his presentation is the drivers. you talk about this, that, and the other thing, but what your main concern should be are the drivers, the muni drivers. i take public transportation and have been taking public transportation for a very, very long time. i happen to know most of the mta director is pretty well. monitor them pretty well by reading the empirical data, so you have to be very careful, as one of the board directors pointed out.

the focus, then the discussion points will be fewer, but a standard to encompass the whole universe, you are not going to have any standards that meet quality upright standards. the supervisors, whether you like it or not, you are going to serve the constituents of san francisco. 811,000 in the daytime, 1.5 million when others come here to work. that is all your responsibility directly and indirectly. the bottom line is service. the bottom line is addressing quality of life issues, but most importantly, whether you like it or not, you have to focus on the human being, and today, the

distraction among the muni drivers is very high. i help you incorporate that in your future presentations and metrobuses. thank you very much. chairman brinkman: thank you. secretary boomer: seeing that there are no more further public comments, the motion is before you. chair brinkman: all in favor? secretary boomer: those young people that are using a clipper card or any of the other options as presented by staff. chair brinkman: ok, can we please have a report on this

before we move to public comment? >> i will be brief. i know a lot of people have been waiting to speak on this item. chair brinkman: 84 your patience. -- thank you for your patience. >> there has been great leadership, david campos, and james, the chinatown cdc and other organizations. i would say it is one of the more positive and pro muni efforts that i have seen in my relatively short time in san francisco, and the one thing that is encouraging about this is it is very much a pro muni initiative, and that is something that regardless of where we end up, this is not people lining up by the dozens to speak against something we are doing to tell us to stop doing something. it is people saying they want to

use our services and want to be able to access our services, and that is significant. what i think we are on the verge of doing here, and, again, regardless of what final shape it takes, it is really an unprecedented step ford in the city and largely for the country in terms of making transit accessible to a large portion of our young people, whether it is part of them for free or a reduced amount, it is a tremendous step forward, and whatever the outcome, it will really affect the region and across the nation. so what i am proposing is the option to make for a pilot period of 22 months to make me any free -- to make unique --

muni free. i know the original call was to make it free for all of the young people at all income levels, but to arrive at this, it includes that the great majority of public comment and the impetus for it in terms of the decline of the yellow school bus system and the increase in the cost of the fast pass and the state of the current economy, this has all surrounded and been related to affordability. i know there are larger desires at play in terms of rolling the next generation of transit ridership, but the real core issue, to me, the real impetus has been about affordability, and i think that that is something that we should address. bear have been concerns that restricting to low-income young people would create administrative burdens, which creates stigma, and i think that

we have been able to demonstrate that we can address those issues. i think the goal to get all of the young people on muni for free has merit in terms of the next generation of transit ridership, but we do have to remember that it is not free. transit is not free. and we have to be responsible in how we manage the resources that enable us to make me work. -- make muni work. i think it is questionable for what extent for hiring, the $21 with a 75 cent fare is really a barrier, and i am not sure that the fare change would address that, but to the extent that it would and we would have significantly more revenue -- more ridership and less revenue, there are trade-offs that we