LOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT

Creating Age-Friendly Communities in small Towns projectLOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT

Supported by Royalties for Regions

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................... 5

GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................... 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................. 7

1.0 BACKGROUND .................................................................................... 16 1.1. AGEING IN AUSTRALIA ......................................................................... 16

1.1.1 AGEING-IN-PLACE ................................................................................. 16 1.2. CASE STUDY CONTEXT: THE WHEATBELT ........................................ 18 1.3. AGEING AND MOBILITY IN THE WHEATBELT ..................................... 20 1.4. AGE FRIENDLY TERMINOLOGY ........................................................... 22

2.0 CREATING AGE-FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES IN SMALL TOWNS PROJECT ...................................................................................................... 22 2.1. LOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT ....................................... 24

2.1.1. LOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT: METHODOLOGY ......... 25

3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................ 26 3.1. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 26 3.2. AGEING AND MOBILITY ........................................................................ 27

CASE STUDY 1 – SOUTHERN MALLEE TRANSPORT CONNECTIONS PARTNERSHIP....................................................................................... 28

3.3. THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY ............................................................... 28 CASE STUDY 2 – NORTHERN RIVERS CARPOOL PROJECT ......................... 29

3.4. COORDINATION ADVANCES ................................................................ 30 CASE STUDY 3 – MEATH RURAL TRANSPORT PROGRAMME...................... 31

3.5. INNOVATIVE MODELS AND CLUSTER HOUSING ............................... 31 CASE STUDY 4 – PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE COMMUNITY TRANSPORT ........... 32

3.6. INTERGENERATIONAL & CROSS-CULTURAL INCLUSION IMPACTS 32 CASE STUDY 5 – AGE FRIENDLY PHILADELPHIA .......................................... 33

3.7. SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 34

4.0 MAP AND GAP ANASLYSIS ............................................................... 35 4.1. EXISTING ENABLERS AND BARRIERS IN THE WHEATBELT ............. 35

4.1.1. REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORT - TRANSWA .................................... 35 4.1.2. PATIENT ASSISTANCE TRANSPORT SUBSIDY (PATS) ...................... 37 4.1.3. COUNTRY AGE PENSION FUEL CARD SCHEME ................................ 37 4.1.4. HOME AND COMMUNITY CARE PROGRAM (HACC) TRANSPORT

SERVICE ................................................................................................ 38 4.1.5. EXISTING COMMUNITY BUSES IN THE WHEATBELT ......................... 39

4.2. SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 40

5.0 EVALUATION OF AGE-FRIENDLY COMMUNITY PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICES ..................................................................................................... 43 5.1. STUDY AREA ......................................................................................... 43 5.2. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 45

5.2.1. COMPARING SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIFFERENCES ............................... 45 5.2.2. COMPARING EXCLUSION AND WELLBEING ....................................... 45 5.2.3. ECONOMIC EVALUATION ..................................................................... 46

5.3. HYDEN TO NARROGIN PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE ....................... 50 5.3.1. CONTEXT ............................................................................................... 50 5.3.2. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................ 52 5.3.3. FINDINGS ............................................................................................... 52

5.4. JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE ............ 57

3

5.4.1. CONTEXT ............................................................................................... 57 5.4.2. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................ 58 5.4.3. FINDINGS ............................................................................................... 59

5.5. WONGAN HILLS to NORTHAM PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE ............ 64 5.5.1. CONTEXT ............................................................................................... 64 5.5.2. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................ 65 5.5.3. FINDINGS ............................................................................................... 66

5.6. MOBILITY PROFILES ............................................................................. 70 5.6.1. PERCEPTIONS OF MOBILITY AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION ................... 70 5.6.2. PROFILE FOR GROUP ONE – WITHOUT MOBILITY DIFFICULTY ....... 71 5.6.3. PROFILE FOR GROUP TWO – WITH SLIGHT TO MODERATE

MOBILITY DIFFICULTY .......................................................................... 72 5.6.4. PROFILES FOR GROUP THREE – WITH MODERATE TO HIGH

MOBILITY DIFFICULTY .......................................................................... 73 5.7. RATING OF THE PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICES ................................ 74 5.8. SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC FINDINGS .................................................. 75

6.0 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 76 6.1. KEY SUBSIDY RECOMMENDATIONS TO GOVERNMENT ................... 77 6.2. INDIVIDUAL PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS .... 79

HYDEN TO NARROGIN TRANSPORT RECOMMENDATIONS ......................... 81 JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP TRANSPORT RECOMMENDATIONS.............. 81 WONGAN HILLS TO NORTHAM TRANSPORT RECOMMENDATIONS ........... 81

6.3. COMMON THEMES AROUND SERVICE OPERATION ......................... 82 EXPAND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA ....................................................................... 82 BOTTOM-UP APPROACH .................................................................................. 82 FURTHER EXPLORE THE DEMAND PROFILE ................................................. 82

6.4. COMMON THEMES AROUND SERVICE SUPPORT ............................. 83 COLLABORATIVE SUPPORT ............................................................................ 83 OPENNESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES ............................................... 83 MONITORING, EVALUATION AND TRANSPARENCY ...................................... 83 SUSTAINABLE FUNDING SOURCE .................................................................. 84

7.0 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 84

8.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 87

9.0 APPENDIX ............................................................................................ 95 APPENDIX A – COMMUNITY BUS PARTICIPANT SURVEY ................................. 95 APPENDIX B – PUBLIC TRANSPORT OPTIONS IN THE WHEATBELT ............... 99 APPENDIX C – EXISTING COMMUNITY TRANSPORT IN SPECIFIC WHEATBELT LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREAS ........................................................................... 100 APPENDIX D – RESEARCH BREAKDOWN OF LITERATURE REVIEWED ........ 102 APPENDIX E – MAP OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TELEHEALTH LOCATION ..... 108 APPENDIX F – HEALTH SERVICES AVAILABLE AT EACH PARTICIPATING REGIONAL CENTRE ............................................................................................ 109 APPENDIX G – QUANTIFYING SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIFFERENCES AND FACTORS OF TRANSPORT DISADVANTAGE .................................................... 110 APPENDIX H – ADVERTISING: HYDEN TO NARROGIN PILOT ......................... 111 APPENDIX I – QUESTION GUIDE AND ANSWERS FOR SHIRE STAFF AND BUS DRIVER ACROSS ALL THREE PILOTS ............................................................... 113 APPENDIX J – OPERATIONAL DATA FOR HYDEN TO NARROGIN PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE........................................................................................ 119 APPENDIX K – ADVERTISING: JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP PILOT .............. 121 APPENDIX L – JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP BUS SERVICE PETITION .......... 122

4

APPENDIX M – SHIRE OF DANDARAGAN AND SHIRE OF GINGIN QUALITATIVE DATA .................................................................................................................... 123 APPENDIX N – ADVERTISING: WONGAN HILLS TO NORTHAM ....................... 125 APPENDIX O – INDIVIDUAL PROFILES FOR GROUP WITHOUT MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS ................................................................................................... 126 APPENDIX P – INDIVIDUAL PROFILES FOR GROUP WITH SLIGHT TO MODERATE MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS ............................................................. 133 APPENDIX Q – INDIVIDUAL PROFILES FOR GROUP WITH MODERATE TO HIGH MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS .................................................................................. 136 APPENDIX R – LATE INDIVIDUAL PROFILES .................................................... 142 APPENDIX S – KEY RECOMMENDATIONS TO GOVERNMENT ........................ 144

5

ABBREVIATIONS ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics CAFC Creating Age Friendly Communities CRC Community Resource Centre CRD Centre for Regional Development DRD Department for Regional Development HACC Home and Community Care Program LGA Local Government Area PATS Patient Assistance Transport Subsidy OECD The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development RfR Royalties for Regions SEIFA Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas UWA University of Western Australia WDC Wheatbelt Development Commission WHO World Health Organisation

6

GLOSSARY Term Description Accessibility The ease of reaching goods, services, amenity and destinations. The

potential for interaction and exchange opportunities Age Friendly Community

A community that supports active ageing opportunities in health, participation and security as a means of improving the quality of life for people as they age

Age-in-Place The ability of people to live independently in their homes and communities with access to accessible and affordable services

Age Friendly Housing

Sustainable community housing that can improve the affordability and attractiveness of a town if coupled with improvements to health care facilities and transport options

Cluster Housing A subdivision technique whereby seniors’ accommodation is grouped together, often with a communal space

Community Transport

A third tier of transport and mobility that fills a need for disadvantaged people within a community without relying on economic profit

Connectivity Directness of links and quality of connections to destinations and services

Cost Benefit Analysis

Means of analysing investment or policy decision as far as practicable in monetary terms. Future costs and benefits are discounted to represent present day values

Demand The traffic volume desiring to travel along a given route Innovative Model A model that includes new techniques, new approaches, or a

modification of a previous practice Integrated Combined into a unified system taking into consideration all transport

relationships Integrated Transport Plan

A transport plan prepared by a single Local Government or groupings of Local Governments to address local or sub-regional transport issues in their areas of jurisdiction. Integrated transport plans are useful tools for the comprehensive analysis of existing and future transport system requirements within an area

Liveable Neighbourhoods

Operational policy and design guidelines for sustainable urban development

Mobility The efficient movement of people and goods (physical movement) Public Transport Travel by modes such as buses, rail, ferries and light rail which are

provided for public use Quality of Living A person’s satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) with the cultural or

intellectual conditions under which they live (as distinct from material comfort)

Regional Centre An economic activity node that serves as a catchment of sub-regional significance and accommodates concentrations of employment, good and services

Stakeholder An individual or group of people that has particular interest or stake in a matter under consideration

Strategy A coordinated approach to achieve a desired outcome Sustainability Development that meets the economic, environmental and social needs

of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs

Transport Demand

The amount of mobility and access that the community require

Transport Disadvantage

Difficulty accessing transport as a result of cost, availability of services or poor physical accessibility

Transport System Infrastructure, services and apparatus involved with the provision of movement and mobility to people and freight

Transwa Transwa is Western Australia's regional public transport provider, linking 240 regional destinations. Transwa is part of the Public Transport Authority and was launched in 2003, replacing the Western Australian Government Railways Commission.

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Australia is getting older, a pattern that is particularly pertinent in regional areas due to internal migration and local and global economic forces. As Australians are living longer, healthier lives, many move or choose to remain in regional areas for associated lifestyle benefits. As a result regional areas, such as the Wheatbelt in Western Australia, have a higher proportion of people over the age of 65 when compared to urban areas. However, these populations often face the challenges of reduced local aged services and transport infrastructure. Issues not only surround those with the need for aged care or health services, but also those individuals’ families and carers who are offered little respite by fuel subsidies or schemes, and require more flexible, on-demand transport options to achieve simple tasks such as visiting their partner. Aged residents in regional Australia need safe transport options that preserve dignity, boost independence, and deliver access to multiple activities that contribute to quality of life1. The purpose of this document is to:

Develop an Integrated Transport Strategy that utilises findings from three aged transport pilots, a Literature Review and an Enablers and Barriers analysis to make a series of recommendations for transport options that allow older residents across the Wheatbelt to better access key health and lifestyle services and infrastructure.

This Integrated Transport Strategy forms part of the $2.53 million ‘Creating Age-Friendly Communities in Small Towns’ (CAFC in Small Towns) Project which aims to improve community infrastructure and health care services to older residents living in the Wheatbelt. Funded by the State Government’s Royalties for Regions Program, this major undertaking represents the State’s single biggest investment into the Wheatbelt aged care industry in WA’s history. As part of the CAFC in Small Towns Project, the Integrated Transport Strategy helped to address aged care issues across the Wheatbelt by identifying innovative ways to provide improved transport options for the community. The WDC is also coordinating the Ageing in the Bush project on behalf of the Regional Development Council that aims to identify aged care models for regional WA that will facilitate ageing-in-place. In recognition of the WDC’s pioneering work in the field of aged care the WDC Chief Executive Officer was invited to join a panel with the International Federation on Ageing (IFA). The IFA is an international non-governmental organisation that aims to improve the quality of life for older citizens through consultation with the United Nations and agencies such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). In 2016, the IFA recognised the WDC’s commitment to enabling people to age-in-place and remain in their communities into old age2. Chapter 1: Background The Wheatbelt is situated in the south-west of Western Australia and comprises an area of 154,862km2 extending out from the Perth metropolitan area. The region is divided into five sub-regions: the Avon, Central Coast, Central East, Central Midlands and Wheatbelt South. These sub-regions are made up of 42 Shires and approximately 160 towns and communities. The population of the Wheatbelt has been steadily growing by 0.9% over the past four years and is the second most populated country region in Western Australia3. Over half of the

1 National Rural Health Alliance 2005 2 Wheatbelt Development Commission 2016 3 Department of Training and Workforce Development 2014

8

region’s population is dispersed across 30 towns, with the remainder residing in towns of less than 200 people4. The Wheatbelt in Western Australia prides itself on its community connectedness, health, safety, happiness and high levels of volunteerism5. In the Wheatbelt, older persons are a highly heterogeneous group, yet government policy tends to focus on the ageing ‘baby-boomer’ generation (currently ranging between 51 and 71 years old). However, the major demographic change being experienced is the growth in the number of very old persons over the age of 856. This makes age-friendly community planning, particularly for transport options, a key priority in the Region7. A high reliance on self-drive and private vehicle ownership coupled with widely dispersed services in the Wheatbelt can contribute to the social exclusion of the aged population by acting as a barrier for older people to participate in events, access healthcare, food shopping and other key activities8. Public transport in the Region currently exists where it is perceived that there is the greatest demand according to the highest concentration of users. As a result, in areas of low population densities there is a need for alternative models of public transport provision, such as small community transport or buses to fill the mobility gap.

Chapter 2: Project overview The Integrated Transport Strategy forms part of the CAFC in Small Towns Project, a holistic solution to addressing aged care issues across Western Australia’s Wheatbelt. The CAFC in Small Towns Project was approved by the Department of Regional Development in 2014 and successfully secured $2.53 million in Royalties for Regions funding. The project was designed to help implement recommendations from the 2012 Central East Aged Care Alliance (CEACA) Aged Care Solution/s and the 2012 Wheatbelt Aged Support and Care Solutions (WASCS) Report. This Integrated Transport Strategy was allocated $352,000 of the $2.53 million CAFC is Small Towns Project funding to improve the level of age-friendly infrastructure, services and inclusion across 42 Local Governments in the Wheatbelt, by completing:

A literature review; A map and gap analysis; and A six month transport pilot program (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: CAFC in Small Towns Project's Integrated Transport Strategy

4 Western Australia Country Health Service 2012 5 Wheatbelt South Sub-Regional Economic Strategy 2014 6 Stones & Gullifer 2016 7 Wheatbelt Development Commission 2014 8 Social Exclusion Unit: London 2003

9

Chapter 3: Research and literature review This chapter presents a research and literature review of case studies of other services nationally and internationally that offer innovative transport options to people living in small, dispersed towns. It identifies:

It is evident from the international, national and state wide literature reviewed in this paper that there are multiple solutions to regional transportation problems. Based on the literature, there are a number of different solutions that could enable older regional residents to better utilise transport services. Some of the enablers identified in the research include the need for sufficient and sustainable funding as well as uniform, straightforward reimbursement for transport volunteers 9 . In particular, Australian case studies suggest a higher chance of success when regional transport is planned using a bottom-up approach with stakeholder collaboration, and flexibility is built into the planning process to provide adaptable, individual support10,11

. In a number of regional communities there is a ‘market failure’ where the private sector is not able to provide required transport to meet demand. These areas may benefit from the establishment of a state wide legislative framework for on-demand vehicles and services, and transport drivers 12 . Optimising existing resources, maintaining fiscal diversity, embracing technology and providing support for users in multiple forms will all prove essential in the creation of a sustainable, aged friendly transport future in these regional areas. In a Western Australian context, Baby Boomers are expected to be wealthier, healthier, longer-living and more car-dependent than past generations 13. Improving mobility creates opportunities for reduced social isolation and a better quality of life for thousands of aged transport users in the Wheatbelt. The surveys and research that follows from the Creating Aged Friendly Community pilot services will further define these recommendations and help determine suitable enablers and solutions for the Wheatbelt. Chapter 4: Map and gap analysis This chapter reviews existing transport assistance in regional WA including Patient Assistance Transport Subsidy (PATS), Home and Community Care (HACC) Program and the Country Age Pension Fuel Card. It provides:

A summary of the issues is presented in Table 1.

9 Davison et al 2014 10 Australian Local Government Association 2006 11 Transport for NSW 2013 12 Department of Transport 2015 13 Currie & Delbose 2009

the role that technology can play in the access of services within regional communities;

coordination innovations that offer transport solutions to people living in small, dispersed towns; and

Provides case studies of innovative transport models both nationally and internationally.

An overview of access to existing public transport services (Transwa buses and trains), including what are the barrier and enablers to these services being used; and

An overview of existing transport schemes including PATS, HACC and Country Age Pension Fuel Card, including any evaluation of these schemes that has previously been undertaken.

10

Table 1: Existing barriers to transportation in the Wheatbelt and possible solutions or enablers to resolve barriers (according to international, national and regional literature)

14 Wheatbelt Development Commission 2014 15 Wheatbelt Workforce Development Alliance 2012 16 Department of Local Government and Communities 2013 17 Western Australia Country Health Services 2013 18 National Rural Health Alliance 2005 19 Kerschner & Hardin 2006 20 Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation 2011 21 Public Transport Authority 2007 22 Davison et al. 2012 23 Western Australia Country Health Services 2016 24 Horsley & Brewin 2014 25 Osmond et al. 2014

Barriers to Public Transport Services

Issue Potential Enablers to Resolve Barriers

Accessibility Dispersed population – few people over a large area14 Variable population size and density 80 Transwa services can’t provide a service to every town15 Distance and proximity to services and regional centre81 Centralisation of government services in regional centres125

Planned and meaningful consultation with communities to meet changing demand and accessibility gaps16

Affordability Potential cost of overnight stays17 Costly service

Uniform and adequate reimbursement18

Frequency Timetables don’t allow for daily return trips129 Adaptive, responsive transport alternatives19 Tailored services only running when required20

Quality Complexity of transport system for new users130 (Un) Awareness of transport system for new users129 Credit card and EFTPOS facilities not available on road

coaches21

Multiple education and communication avenues to familiarise new users132

Introduction of electronic payment options where applicable22

Barriers to PATS Issue Potential Enablers to Resolve Barriers Accessibility Inflexible for specific or changing circumstances e.g.

residents living 100km-350km from treatment23 Infrequent approval of taxi vouchers134 Long waiting periods24

Support for local volunteer organisations to lead patient transportation135

Clear information and flexible options, available through multiple mediums25

11

26 Department of Regional Development 2016 27 Parliament of WA 2015

Barriers to Country Age Pension Fuel Card Scheme


Accessibility and Affordability

The fuel subsidy does not apply to public transport or community transportation26

The fuel card does not take into account geographical location

The fuel card does not take into account individual health requirements

The fuel card subsidy limits seniors’ mobility by being inflexible to specific circumstances

The fuel card is limited to one card per couple each year

Adjust the monetary value of the Country Age Pension Fuel Card to align with the geographic location of the person to whom it is issued27

Barriers to Home and Community Care Transport Program



Extensive demand for non-emergency health/medical transport

Significant difference between States and Territories in terms of flexibility around categories of specialist medical services

Smaller pool of volunteers available to provide community transport services in the future

Transport costs don’t take into account financial needs of carers

Make better use of expertise and services to respond to some of the embedded transport needs

Maintain, support and develop the volunteer base Increase capacity and scale of services to support

greater effectiveness and efficiency Provide clear policy guidelines Provide non-emergency patient transport for residential

age care clients due to diminishing capacity The financial needs of carers should be taken into

account when HACC Transport assessments are being conducted

12

Chapter 5: Evaluation of Wheatbelt Aged Friendly Community Pilots This chapter evaluates the three pilot services using community feedback collected every two months and data collected from Local Government surveys. The chapter includes:

The pilot transport services for this project took place across four of the five Wheatbelt sub-regions and made the following stops (see Figure 2):

Wongan- Northam Pilot The key findings from the Wongan Hills to Northam pilot service were as follows:

“[The pilot transport service] had a huge impact on the users of the service. There is no way for older residents who cannot drive to get out of the town. The older residents in town are very loyal to local businesses and services, however, there are some things that they cannot access. Therefore the service to Northam gave them the opportunity to do so.” – Wongan Hills Pilot Transport Bus Driver

Hyden- Narrogin Pilot The key findings from the Hyden to Narrogin pilot service were as follows28:

“Great service for me because I don’t like driving long distances by myself…it provides an excellent service for our community both socially and medically” – Passenger Ten

28 Note: For this Strategy, all respondents will be kept anonymous

Report on data collected during operational monitoring including; passenger numbers, number of trips in the month, fare collection, and operational issues;

Evaluate community feedback, including; user satisfaction, and data on how the service enables age friendly communities;

Provide an overview of the cost effectiveness of the pilots to determine if the pilot model is economically sustainable; and

Report on the impact the pilot services had on enabling people to better age in their community and whether a model like the pilots retains more people in their community in the longer term.

Hyden - Kondinin - Kulin - Wickepin - Narrogin (Wheatbelt South); Jurien Bay - Cervantes - Lancelin - Sovereign Hill - Woodridge - Joondalup

(Central Coast and Metropolitan Perth); and Wongan Hills - Calingiri - Bolgart - Northam (Central Midlands and Avon).

Users were mainly female, mostly over the age of 75; The most common reasons for travel were shopping and health services; The majority of passengers were picked up from Wongan Hills; The service peaked towards the final weeks, once awareness had grown; and Word of mouth was the most effective form of promotion, with one individual

taking the initiative to advertise the service and notify relevant community members.

Most users were female and over the age of 60; The most common reason for travel was for medical or social reasons; The majority of users were very happy with the service and wanted it to continue; It was felt that advertising and awareness of the service could be improved; Some passengers would be willing to pay more for the service for it to continue; The obliging nature and dedication of the bus driver enhanced the experience for

many users and was critical to the success of the service; and The school holiday periods were very quiet and it is not worthwhile running the

service during this time.

13

Jurien Bay to Joondalup Pilot The key findings from the Jurien Bay to Joondalup pilot service were as follows:

The shire of Gingin sold 94 out of 132 tickets (71.2%) over the 22-week pilot period;

“Since the bus service commenced [in] early April, I have made a new circle of friends and we all look forward for our get-together each Monday… I am very happy with the service (as I don’t drive).” – Passenger Nine

Figure 2: Map of pilot transport services and existing Transwa public transport rail and bus services in the Wheatbelt; derived from Transwa data (Public Transport Authority 2016)

Most of the passengers were female, with the majority being over the age of 65; Woodridge was the most common pick-up point; There is strong demand for the service throughout the year, with many passengers

relying on it for ongoing specialist medical appointments; The number of passengers increased over time as more people became aware of the

service; Family catch ups have become common as the drop off point at the bus/train station

offers an easy commute to other suburbs of Perth;

There was a very strong desire from passengers for the service to continue; Rain and stormy weather was associated with lower passenger numbers; The social aspect and the enjoyment from meeting new people was highlighted as a

big draw card to use the service; and More targeted advertising of the service is needed.

Pilot Transport Services and Public Transport Options in the Wheatbelt

14

Chapter 6: Recommendations This chapter provides recommendations for future action in the provision of transport in the context of ‘aged friendly communities’. It will:

Summary of Broad Recommendations Service operation Expand eligibility criteria Consider the services a whole of community resource while keeping an aged friendly emphasis on the service. Bottom up approach This approach will encourage local participation in all aspects of planning via community consultation, information sharing or participatory evaluations such as self-assessments. Further explore the demand profile It is recommended that there be further examination of demand on an individual scale to tap into the community and determine how best to meet individual needs. Service Support Collaborative Support Local Government co-operation, engagement and capability are a critical factor for success. It is recommended that the Local Governments underwrite the cost of empty seats on the service to encourage Local Government involvement and marketing. Openness to technological advances Low-order technological awareness exists across a number of smaller regional communities, particularly amongst older residents. However, technology can offer integration of social activities with mobility in regional areas. Monitoring, evaluation and transparency Across the examined transport literature, and in the findings of the pilot services, it became evident that ongoing monitoring and evaluation is critical to long-term success. Sustainable Funding Source The economic and demographic diversity of the Wheatbelt corresponds to differences in local resources and capabilities. In order to account for these differences, it is recommended that any future transport plans explore all opportunities to ease the cost burden on remote and regional transport operators. It is critical to consider funding and financing options for whole-of-life costs of the project, especially as older residents can become reliant on that form of transport to access specialist services in the future.

The summary of the recommendations for the individual pilots is presented in Table 2.

Identify broad recommendations for future action in the provision of transport in the context of ‘aged friendly communities’;

Develop a broad implementation overview that identifies key areas of action and who is responsible; and

Provide funding scenarios if the pilot models are considered to be viable transport options, including; state government funding with community / Local Government contributions, fully funded by Local Government or private operator funded.

15

Table 2: Summary table of recommendations for each pilot transport service undertaken in the Wheatbelt

Recommendations Hyden to Narrogin Pilot Transport Jurien Bay to Joondalup Pilot Transport Wongan Hills to Northam Pilot Transport

Advertising More promotion needed about services and amenities Narrogin e.g. heated pool

Expand on advertising avenues e.g. radio, mailbox drop or feature in local newspaper calendar

Make the current advertising design clearer

More promotion via a mailbox drop and a Facebook page

Repeat service advertising in the Moore River News

Improve marketing and awareness with more pamphlets in shire and Community Resource Centre offices

Expand on advertising avenues e.g. radio, local newsletters, larger print timetables

Booking System Continue with existing booking system Could simplify booking system More training required for shire staff Cost Continue with current cost structure If service was open to all ages, persons

under the age of 50 could pay an additional $10

Continue with current cost structure

Eligibility Expand eligibility to whole community to make service more viable

Open up the service to other age groups to fill the seats

Could be expanded to the rest of the community if needed

Frequency Avoid running service in quiet periods e.g. School Holidays

Run once a month instead of fortnightly

Some desire to run the service twice a week instead of once

Needs to run year-round for passengers to access ongoing medical appointments

Continue running fortnightly or alter to every three weeks

Flexibility Friendly and flexible driver critical to success Friendly and flexible driver critical to success

Friendly and flexible driver critical to success

Operation Continue with existing bus and operation Require bus with wheelchair access Require bus with wheelchair access Organisational Support

Link with interest groups and tie in with local events in Narrogin

Better coordination at destination for more frail passengers to get around in Narrogin

Collaborate with HACC providers to communicate the difference between services

Explore most effective way of sharing management and operational roles in the service

Motivate the Northam Age Care Centre to explain all the services they offer to passengers

Route Occasionally change the destination e.g. Williams

Low uptake from Hyden, need to re-evaluate starting destination

Occasionally change the destination e.g. Geraldton

Include a rest stop with access to a bathroom and food half way

Continue route flexibility depending on where people have booked from

Subsidy Should be funded by State in partnership with Local Governments

Local Government cover cost of empty seats on pilot

Dedicated funding and resourcing is necessary to keep the service running

Technology Possibility of sending text message

alert/reminder the day before the service Technology not thought to benefit users Technology not though to benefit users

1.0 BACKGROUND Population growth, population ageing and urbanization are occurring at an unprecedented rate around the world. By 2050 the global population is forecast to reach 9.3 billion people with persons over the age of 65 expected to represent 16% of the population at 1.5 billion11.

1.1. AGEING IN AUSTRALIA

In Australia, declining fertility rates and the impending retirement of the ‘Baby Boomer’ generation (born between 1945 and 1965)29 is leading to a rapidly aging population. As a result, the proportion of people aged 65 and over is expected to increase from 13.8% in 2011 to 25.3% by 204730. In non-metropolitan Australia, 16.8% of the population is over the age of 65, compared to the national average of 13.8%31. This trend is occurring alongside a rising demand for health and aged care services as the pressures and costs of city living are becoming unattainable for many residents, resulting in more people seeking a rural lifestyle alternative32. Western Australia is expected to experience a 91.5% increase in the number of people over 65 between 2011 and 2026 (see Table 3). This growth rate is the highest in the country and is significantly higher than the national average of 64.9%33,34. Table 3: Population over 65 years of age in 2011 and projected for 2026 by Australian jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction 2011 65+ Population 2026 65+ Population Estimate

Growth %

NSW 1,037,165 1,653,000 59.3 VIC 765,637 1,250,171 63.3 QLD 584,163 1,009,077 72.7 WA 281,832 539,711 91.5 SA 260,678 392,459 50.6

TAS 82,986 128,357 54.7 ACT 38,653 70,448 82.3 NT 17,538 26,164 49.2

National 3,068,652 5,059,387 64.9 Source: Verso Consulting (2014) page 8, derived from ABS 2011 census data and ABS Age Population Projections.

1.1.1 AGEING-IN-PLACE In Australia, there is a growing trend for older people to age-in-place, defined as a person’s ability to live independently in their homes and communities with access to affordable services35. Recent academic literature suggests that the majority of persons over 75 years of age wish to remain in their homes for as long as possible36,37. The idea behind this notion is that older people who are given the choice to remain in familiar settings will have more positive outcomes in terms of independence, social participation and health than if they had to

29 Australian Bureau of Statistics 2015 30 Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development 2015 31 Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development 2015 32 Kinnear, P 2001 33 Verso Consulting 2014 34 Western Australian Planning Commission 2012 35 World Health Organisation 2007 36 Oldsberg and Winters 2005 37 Gitlin 2003

17

leave their home38. For ageing-in-place to be a viable option for ageing residents there must be effective and high quality community health care facilities, affordable age appropriate accommodation options, a diverse range of retail options and accessible transport options32. The Australian Government has included the concept of ageing-in-place in recent aged care reforms39. In particular, the changes aim to offer choice and flexibility to ageing residents and support people to stay at home and in their communities for as long as possible20. The policy discussion around an individual’s ability to age-in-place is more pronounced in regional Australia as access to health services, lifestyle amenities and transport are often less accessible in smaller communities. To understand the increasing desire to age-in-place amongst regional residents, the individual motivations and circumstances that lead to this desire need to be examined40. The concept of ageing-in-place follows the emerging belief that a rapidly growing and ageing population will place an unsustainable burden on resources32. Creating infrastructure and policies that enables residents to be self-reliant and remain in their community over time is one solution to this potential burden. According to the WHO, an age-friendly community is one that supports active ageing opportunities in health, participation and security as a means to improve the quality of life of people as they age, addressing the following16:

Increasingly, it is believed age-friendly community planning is designed for all ages, not just for the aged population. Recent research has found that enabling independent living as an age-friendly strategy can create a deeper sense of satisfaction for residents 41 . Benefits associated with ageing-in-place include established social networks, psychological wellbeing and better perceptions of comfort and safety23. Often referred to as the ‘continuity theory’, there is a positive correlation between ageing in a familiar social setting and an individual’s continuity of physiological wellbeing42. Similarly, residents who live at home tend to cope better with change and loss associated with old age, such as widowhood and loss of mobility32. Many ageing residents in Australia have limited influence on the decision-making process when entering institutional care. Often, in cases where an individual can no longer live independently, family members or health care professionals will make residential decisions on their behalf24. In regional Australia this is compounded by there being few regional residential options available for older people. Age-friendly community planning aims to enhance the options available to ageing residents in regional Australia in order to enable them to make independent decisions and maintain control of their lives for as long as possible. The high rate of home ownership in the 65 and over age group has provided security of tenure for many residents and influenced the development of ageing-in-place as a primary theme in Australian age care policy43. Rural and regional residents represent 36% of the 65 and over age group in Australia, and for many, remaining independent is a significant aspiration25. Despite higher levels of social connectedness compared to urban areas, regional communities often have issues with the availability of appropriate housing, support infrastructure and access to services and transport 44. In order for Australian residents to 38 Sixsmith & Sixsmith 2008 39 Department of Health 2016 40 Whelan et al. 2006 41 Kinnear, P 2001 42 Stones & Gullifer 2016 43 Department of Health and Ageing 2008 44 Davis, S & Bartlett, H 2008

Recognises the great diversity among older people; Promotes older people’s inclusion and contribution in all areas of community life; Respects older people’s decisions and lifestyle choices; and Anticipates and responds to ageing-related needs and preferences.

18

effectively age-in-place there must be transport options in place that enhance mobility and accessibility to essential services such as health care.

1.2. CASE STUDY CONTEXT: THE WHEATBELT

The Wheatbelt is situated in the south-west of Western Australia and comprises an area of 154,862km2 extending out from the Perth metropolitan area. The region is divided into five sub-regions: the Avon, Central Coast, Central East, Central Midlands and Wheatbelt South, as seen in Figure 3. These sub-regions are made up of 42 Shires and approximately 160 towns and communities. The population of the Wheatbelt has been steadily growing by 0.9% over the past four years and is the second most populated country region in Western Australia 45 . Over half of the region’s population is dispersed across 30 towns, with the remainder residing in towns of less than 200 people46. The population percentage of each Sub-region is displayed in Figure 4. The Wheatbelt prides itself on its community connectedness, health, safety, happiness and high levels of volunteerism47. In the Wheatbelt, older persons are a highly heterogeneous group, yet government policy tends to focus on the ageing ‘baby-boomer’ generation (currently ranging between 51 and 71 years old). However, the major demographic change being experienced is the growth in the number of very old persons over the age of 8548. This demographic change is further exacerbated by fewer young people entering agriculture as a vocation and the loss of young people out of country areas reducing the number of children taking over the family farm49. This makes age-friendly community planning, particularly for transport options, a key priority in the Region50. A high reliance on self-drive and private vehicle ownership, coupled with widely dispersed services in the Wheatbelt can contribute to the social exclusion of the aged population by acting as a barrier for older people to participate in events, access healthcare, food shopping and other key activities 51. Public transport in the Region currently exists where it is perceived that there is the greatest demand according to the highest concentration of users. As a result, in areas of low population densities there is a need for alternative models of public transport provision, such as small community transport or buses to fill the mobility gap26.

45 Department of Training and Workforce Development 2014 46 Western Australia Country Health Service 2012 47 Wheatbelt South Sub-Regional Economic Strategy 2014 48 Stones & Gullifer 2016 49 ABS Australian Social Trends 2003 50 Wheatbelt Development Commission 2014 51 Social Exclusion Unit: London 2003

19

Figure 3: Wheatbelt regional and Sub-regional map. Source: Wheatbelt Development Commission (2014)

Figure 4: Wheatbelt population percentage according to Sub-region, according to 2011 population data (ABS, 2011).

1.3. AGEING AND MOBILITY IN THE WHEATBELT

Ageing population percentages by Wheatbelt Local Government Areas (LGA) are shown in Table 4. The geographical spread of population percentage over 65 years of age for Australia, including the Wheatbelt, is shown in Figure 5. Table 4: Wheatbelt population percentage over 65 years of age by Local Government Area (Ten highest in the State highlighted in orange. LGAs that participated in the pilot transport services highlighted in pink (Jurien Bay to Joondalup) blue (Hyden to Narrogin) and green (Wongan Hills to Northam)).

Local Government Area

Percentage of Population 65+


Percentage of Population 65+

Quairading 24.1 West Arthur 16.0 Beverley 24.0 Goomalling 15.7 Wyalkatchem 23.9 Kulin 15.5 Koorda 23.0 Northam 15.4 Brookton 23.0 Cunderdin 15.0 Corrigin 22.6 Cuballing 15.0 Wagin 21.8 Narrogin 15.0 Narembeen 21.7 Westonia 14.5 Kellerberrin 21.7 Dalwallinu 14.3 Trayning 21.6 Wickepin 13.6 York 20.1 Nungarin 13.5 Dumbleyung 19.8 Chittering 13.4 Pingelly 19.6 Merredin 13.4 Dandaragan 19.4 Moora 13.4 Mukinbudin 18.8 Wongan-Ballidu 13.4 Gingin 18.8 Kondinin 12.9 Dowerin 17.3 Victoria Plains 11.9 Bruce Rock 17.1 Narrogin 11.3 Wandering 16.8 Mount Marshall 11.3 Toodyay 16.3 Lake Grace 10.6 Williams 16.2 Yilgarn 9.8

Source: Parliament of WA (2014) page 215, derived from ABS 2011 census data.

21

Figure 5: Proportion of population aged 65 years and over, Australia-wide. Note: figures rounded up. Source: Population by Age and Sex Australia, 2013 (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2014).

For the ageing population of the Wheatbelt, private vehicles represent freedom and self-reliance, and are increasingly a major contributing factor to an individual’s sense of self-worth52. The Seniors Strategic Planning Framework identifies access to essential services as one of five key pathways to an age-friendly Western Australia53. Access to essential services in the Wheatbelt is limited by the availability of these services and by poor transport provision. The concentration of health care specialists in regional centres is due to service rationalisation and uneven development54 across the Wheatbelt. Rationalisation, while not a new concept to the Region, has resulted in people in regional and rural areas needing to travel outside their local towns to access essential services55 due to smaller regional towns being unviable for health care specialist infrastructure. High car dependency in the Wheatbelt results in a loss of self-esteem and mobility when an individual is deemed unfit to drive or when they lose access to a private vehicle39. Limited public transport options have resulted in an over-reliance on voluntary ambulance services for patient transfers, social isolation and expensive overnight stays in regional centres or metropolitan areas56. The transport domain crosses into all aspects of community life, reducing the quality of life of aged residents when they are left with limited or no transport services57. These issues frequently result in older people leaving their Wheatbelt community and families in order to access the support and care services they require39.

52 Currie & Delbose 2009 53 Parliament of WA 2014 54 Tonts 1998 55 McKenna 2012 56 Wheatbelt Development Commission 2014 57 Council on the Ageing Western Australia 2013

22

1.4. AGE FRIENDLY TERMINOLOGY

This Local Transport Plan aims to investigate the relationship between ageing-in-place and age-friendly transportation options. As a relatively under-researched area of study, particularly in regional Western Australia, definitions of ‘older people’, ‘the aged’, ‘elderly’ and ‘seniors’ vary across the literature. For consistency and clarity, the terms ‘elderly’, ‘aged’ and ‘senior’ are used interchangeably in the context of an Australian resident aged 65 years old and over. Similarly, there are various definitions of mobility and accessibility throughout the literature with many favouring a predominantly metropolitan perspective 58. Many academic papers ignore the spatial inequalities of regional transport service provision. Likewise, numerous regional studies do not look at the differences in transport needs and demand according to different age groups; choosing instead to study transport demand and options in more general terms11. As a result, the literature search was broadened to an international level, with a focus on areas with comparable geography, population density and population dispersal to the Wheatbelt, such as regional Canada and rural areas of the United Kingdom. In defining these terms it is important to reflect on the diversity of older Australians and acknowledge how policy and transport options are unlikely to meet all needs of such a heterogeneous group. Basic assumptions about the expectations and preferences of older Australians regarding age-friendly transport can be gleaned from aged care and transport literature. There is an identifiable knowledge gap in terms of linking different ageing patterns with individual requirements or abilities to access transport options. The lack of adequate data poses a problem for understanding the changing patterns of aged transport use in regional areas11. It is therefore difficult to evaluate how the Wheatbelt compares to regions with a similar dispersed spatial pattern.

2.0 CREATING AGE-FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES IN SMALL TOWNS PROJECT

The CAFC in Small Towns Project forms part of a holistic solution to addressing aged care issues across Western Australia’s Wheatbelt. The project was approved by the Department of Regional Development in 2014 and successfully secured $2.53 million in Royalties for Regions funding. The project was designed to help implement recommendations from the 2012 Central East Aged Care Alliance (CEACA) Aged Care Solution/s and the 2012 Wheatbelt Aged Support and Care Solutions (WASCS) Report, as highlighted in Figure 6.

58 Whelan et al. 2006

23

Figure 6: Major milestones of WDC's age care development that have led up to the development of this Integrated Transport Strategy (highlighted in orange)

2012 NEWROC and

WEROC formed the Central East Aged

Care Alliance (CEACA)

Nov 2012 Verso Consulting was engaged by

CEACA to produce the Central East Wheatbelt Aged

Support and Care Regional Solution/s (across 11 LGAs)

2014 Verso Consulting

produced the Wheatbelt Aged

Support and Care Solutions (WASCS) Project, instigated to widen the scope of

the CEACA process (across 31 LGAs)

2014 Creating Age Friendly Communities (CAFC)

in Small Towns Project developed to implement

recommendations from the CEACA and WASCS reports,

receiving $2.53 million RfR funding

July 2014 Introduction of the CAFC Small Value

Grant Scheme to act as a catalyst to

implement projects identified in the CAFC planning

toolbox

Nov 2016 CAFC Transport Solutions Project

developed to improve transport options for older residents living in

the Wheatbelt

Nov 2016 CAFC Evaluation

Full Report developed to evaluate the

effectiveness and efficiency of the

CAFC Small Value Grant Scheme and

planning toolbox

Completed Ongoing

The CAFC is Small Towns Project – Integrated Transport Strategy was developed to identify innovative ways to provide improved transport options for the Wheatbelt. To improve the level of age-friendly infrastructure, services and inclusion across 42 Local Governments in the Wheatbelt, this Integrated Transport Strategy involved completing:

Figure 7: CAFC in Small Towns Project's Integrated Transport Strategy. Derived from: Creating Age Friendly Communities in Small Towns Project (Wheatbelt Development Commission, 2015)

2.1. LOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT

The CAFC in Small Towns Project – Integrated Transport Strategy aimed to improve transport options for older residents living in the Wheatbelt. It focused on identifying transport options from small towns to regional centres, allowing older residents across the Region to better access key services and infrastructure including health and medical, specialty retail as well as recreation and social opportunities. Three pilot bus services were trialled to investigate the potential demand and impact of a community transport model in the Wheatbelt. These three bus pilots were active for six months, between February 2016 and July 2016. The pilot routes included:

The pilots were run by WDC in collaboration with the local Shires of Dandaragan, Gingin, Kondinin, Kulin, Victoria Plains, Wickepin and Wongan-Ballidu. Figure 8 illustrates each of the pilot transport services and maps out comparative levels of transport disadvantage across each Local Government area in the Wheatbelt59. 59 Transport disadvantage was interpreted as lower average values (when compared to the State average) for the following groups: women, elderly, low income, unemployed, ethnic minorities and SEIFA scores. These values were grouped into four quantiles and overlaid in the Aurin Portal to create Figure 3.

A literature review; A map and gap analysis; and A six month transport pilot program (Figure 7).

Wheatbelt South (fortnightly service) – Shire of Kondinin (from Hyden) to Kulin, Wickepin and concluding in Narrogin

Central Midlands (weekly service) – Shire of Wongan Hills to Calingiri, Bolgart and concluding in Northam

Coastal (weekly service) – Jurien Bay to Cervantes, Lancelin, Sovereign Hill, Woodridge and concluding in Joondalup

25

The findings from the three pilots guided the development of recommendations for the provision of alternative and innovative transport options for older residents travelling from small towns to service centres.

Figure 8: Pilot transport routes and a choropleth map of transport disadvantage in the Wheatbelt according to each Local Government area (with darker shades of orange indicating a highly potential for residents to experience transport disadvantage). Data derived from ABS 2011 Census.

2.1.1. LOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT: METHODOLOGY The WDC and UWA created a reporting template for the pilot services that recorded evidence-based (qualitative and quantitative) information and community feedback. This included pre-screening surveys for first-time users, community surveys every two months for on-going users and monthly operational surveys and bus driver surveys for general comments and observations. The templates for these surveys are available in Appendix A. The monthly operational monitoring survey sought to gather the following information:

The community feedback evaluation (conducted every two months) aimed to capture the following information:

Passenger numbers; Number of trips in the month (km’s travelled); Record of fare collection; and Any operational issues with the service.

26

Participating Local Governments distributed the surveys and the WDC collated the findings and presented them to the Centre for Regional Development (CRD) at UWA. The CRD was responsible for the interpretation and analysis of the qualitative data and analysing the findings with reference to the broader academic literature. The working party (compromising of UWA and WDC staff), met every three months to report on progress. The questions used in the survey were sourced from a comprehensive survey on the relationship between social inclusion and transport, part of the Victorian Household Travel Survey60. This survey primarily concentrates on three dimensions: transport disadvantage, social exclusion and social wellbeing. Additionally, socio-demographic information and service satisfaction ratings are captured. To compare changes in wellbeing as a result of the pilot transport services, short pre-screening surveys were administered to understand the passengers’ alternative transport modes, frequency of visits to regional centres and the reasons for travel. This Local Transport Plan also involved a literature review of international, national, state and local research as well as case study examinations to establish trends and age-friendly transport options for regional areas. A more detailed methodology of the literature review is included in Section 3.1. A final component of this research involved the identification of key barriers and enablers to transport options in the Wheatbelt. The barriers and enablers were analysed alongside information from the WDC pilot transport services in order to formulate local transport recommendations. The recommendations, including a summary table, can be found in Section 6.

3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1. METHODOLOGY

This literature review compares various national and international transport services case studies that offer innovative transport options to people living in small towns with dispersed population profiles. A thorough scan of academic literature was undertaken across peer-reviewed journal articles, as well as government and community documents, research publications and reports on an international, national, state-wide and regional scale. The literature was sourced from various research databases including the JSTOR scholarly journal archive, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Wiley online library and ProQuest research library, with other research publications and reports being sourced from community and Government websites and documents. Materials from international journals were reviewed to gain an international perspective on mobility and lifestyles of older people in rural areas and of transport services in different countries. The Local Transport Plan brief specified that the literature review look at four areas of transport innovation, each with an associated case study:

60 Currie et al. 2009

User satisfaction with service; Things that work well, and areas requiring improvement; and How the service fosters age-friendly communities.

27

The literature review summarises the local Wheatbelt, State, Australian and International literature. Due to the limited number of local Wheatbelt and regional Western Australian studies on age-friendly transport options, international and national research was particularly important. The review looked at international studies from a number of countries, including Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States and worldwide publications, such as those released by the WHO. A complete breakdown of the research is included in Appendix D.

3.2. AGEING AND MOBILITY

As regional services amalgamate around larger centres or service nodes, the question arises of whether elderly people in regional communities have the ability to overcome increasing distances for health care and social services 61 . Often the availability of hospitals and specialist care is related to population density in regional towns to cater to a larger demand, creating uneven supply in highly dispersed regional areas61. Fragmented development can lead to regional residents needing to travel longer distances to large regional centres for services and amenities 62. With centralised restructuring of health care services, whereby services move to larger towns, there is an increasing reliance on informal support networks for transportation in smaller regional towns63. Despite growing demand for health services as the population ages, there have been cuts to public transport across OECD nations (the 34 countries that account for 63% of world GDP) that affect older residents’ mobility and ability to access these services63. In the United States and United Kingdom the absence of transport options and an increasing regionalisation of services have resulted in many seniors having to move out of their communities as they age63. There are various concerns around older people’s capacity to continue driving into old age, as well as heightened safety concerns resulting from vision and hearing impairment problems associated with ageing. Deteriorating health and a lack of confidence in driving, particularly in older females, often results in drivers voluntarily reducing their time on the road or ceasing to drive altogether64. Case studies in Germany have found that limited rural mobility in older populations mainly impaired women over the age of 75, with the most limited mobility experienced by single older females with health problems61. This group was less able to cope with difficult social conditions and longer distances to access medical services. Australian studies have drawn similar conclusions on ageing in mobility. In Australia, men are 5.7 times more likely to drive than women of the same age and health capacity, with men often associating vehicle ownership and driving with masculinity and power, linked strongly to personal worth and self-esteem64. Byles and Galliienne (2012) found that 71% of older women in Australia are primary carers and 47% work as volunteers, often relying on access to public transport. When older females in regional areas are no longer confident to drive, this can impact their social interactions, the livelihoods of people in their care and personal feelings of self-worth64. Ceasing driving has been associated with depression, loneliness, social isolation and strained relationships due to increased dependence on others for mobility64. This decline in physical

61 Giesel et al. 2013 62 Carson & Koch 2013 63 Ryser & Halseth 2012 64 Byles & Gallienne 2012

The role of technology; Coordination advances; Innovative models and cluster housing; and Intergenerational & cross-cultural inclusion impacts.

28

and emotional well-being is heightened in regional and rural areas in Australia64. One example of regional transport options aimed at improving mobility for older residents is the Southern Mallee Transport Connections Partnership (SMTCP). In 2003, eleven local organisations across South Australia and Victoria formed the SMTCP to develop transport service that meet the needs of rural communities and improve mobility options.

CASE STUDY 1 – SOUTHERN MALLEE TRANSPORT CONNECTIONS PARTNERSHIP The SMTCP’s aim was to better coordinate existing transport services and to develop new transport solutions for the sub-region, covering 29 townships. The transport connections program improved active transport, non-emergency medical transport, public transport, community transport and volunteer services in regional Australia. One example of the 28 different projects that were developed is the Swan Hill Community Transport Service. This service was only eligible to residents who could not access other transport options due to age, illness, disability, fear of public transport or a lack of public transport in the area. The Swan Hill Community Transport Service did not have recurrent funding and required passenger contributions of $15 minimum for a one-way trip to cover running costs. The donation was calculated at a rate of 0.22 cents per kilometre (one way = two trips). A second example of an SMTCP project is the Birchip/Watchem Local Transport Service. This service was developed in partnership with the Buloke Shire Council, who provided a council vehicle every Friday to be driven by a local volunteer. Passengers were required to book in advance via telephone. The service delivered demand-responsive door-to-door transport for anyone in the community who was unable to drive themselves or access a vehicle, with a small donation accepted to cover fuel costs. Despite the success of the program, the partnership and associated transport initiatives were discontinued in 2013 due to State funding being withdrawn. This case study is an example of the importance of continuous external funding for community transport for long-term success65. Mobility is intricately linked to choice. As individuals age in regional and rural communities there is often less choice in regard to modes of transport when compared to urban areas. In Australia’s Northern Territory, and also in the Alpine villages of Austria, the lack of infrastructure to support mobility results in individuals being excluded from economic and social opportunities, limiting their ability to participate66. Similarly, a survey of older regional and rural residents in North Dakota found that weather and road conditions presented a significant barrier to mobility66. Cold, rainy and dark conditions impacted the decision of up to 40% of older drivers to avoid driving, while the most common problem for older residents, in regard to public transport, included inconvenient scheduling of services and inadequate shelters whilst waiting 66. Limiting transport options for older residents can limit all other aspects of their life and reduce independence when they need it most.

3.3. THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY

In the context of this review, transport accessibility refers to the ability of older residents in regional communities to reach quality services and activities in a number of different locations67. Transport accessibility encompasses the connectivity of transport systems, quality and affordability of the service, as well as the capability of seniors to use the service 68. Technology plays a central role in the capability and confidence of seniors using a service by providing information on multiple transport options and how best to use them68. The role of

65 Southern Mallee Transport Connections Partnership 2013 66 Mattson 2011 67 Litman 2016 68 Kerschner et al. 2006

29

technology is becoming increasingly crucial in communication and coordination of transport services69. In recent years technology’s greatest role has been in market development and the expansion of opportunities such as providing flexible booking systems and real-time information69. Increasing proportions of older residents in the Wheatbelt live alone, have adult children to support economically, are working part-time, and are very competent with technology 70 . Hence, it is possible that the emerging aged population in regional Australia will be more willing to access transportation information online or via smartphones. However, the Wheatbelt experiences irregular internet and mobile coverage, widespread mobile black spots and internet connectivity issues across the Region70. Technology can only benefit transport accessibility if telecommunication services are reliable, available and are trusted by the user71. For technology to be properly harnessed in transportation access, telecommunications must be expanded and improved throughout the Region. Once telecommunications are established in the Region, there must be social and educational support for seniors to learn how to use them69. One example of successful implementation is a community transport bus in regional Victoria that included an online portal with videos on how to use the service. This was accompanied by courses at local community centres that developed skills in computing and mobile phone use for seniors72.

CASE STUDY 2 – NORTHERN RIVERS CARPOOL PROJECT The Western Region of New South Wales has a comparable population density to the Wheatbelt with 0.2 persons per square kilometre (compared to 0.47 persons/km2 for the Wheatbelt), with 49,000 residents in the Region having very limited public transport options. The Northern Rivers Carpool Project is a web-based carpooling network designed to create links between community members travelling similar routes. The project is Australia’s first government-funded regional carpooling service established in response to an ageing population and increased reliance on community or on-demand transport. The Western Region of New South Wales received $376,000 for the Community Transport Program, as part of a $7.5 million funding for local providers across the State to assist residents with physical, social or geographical factors that limit their access to transport options. The local Shire, regional TAFE and University, and local health care providers offered their support. A dedicated website was established, with interactive information for users including videos on ‘How to Join’ and step-by-step instructions on ‘How to Install the IPhone App’; by April 2016, there were 3,693 registered car-poolers. The website also provides information ranging from ‘parking availability’ to etiquette suggestions including ‘avoiding strong perfume’. With real-time updates and GPS tracking, the Carpool Project is a financially viable option that harnesses technology whilst offering social connection for seniors who otherwise may be isolated in their community73. Technology and access to technology plays a role within Australian regional communities in terms of meeting health care needs and demands for older residents. Australian-based initiatives for regional and rural healthcare include the use of technology to overcome issues of geographic distance and isolation. One example of a technology-based healthcare initiative is the Emergency Telehealth Service (Telehealth) in regional health centres. Telehealth provides two-way audio and high definition videoconferencing between the regional hospitals’ Emergency Department and the treating emergency specialist in Perth74. This is achieved via

69 Davison et al. 2014 70 Department of Local Government and Communities 2013 71 Osmond et al. 2014 72 Kendig et al. 2014 73 Transport for NSW 2013 74 WA Country Health Service 2016

30

the WA Health Information and Communication Technology (ICT) network74. The introduction of Telehealth has enabled regionally based doctors and nurses to improve access to timely medical advice as well as supported rural clinicians to provide the right care at the right time including close to home, where possible74. Telehealth services rely on a strong and reliable broadband connection, with subtle differences in the type of internet connection having critical implications 75. In rural, remote and some regional areas, the best option for broadband internet connection is often satellite due to limited options. The satellite signal has a farther distance to travel and this often results in a time lag in connection. This service can also be more difficult and expensive to install when compared to ADSL or NBN options76. In 2012, 3% of Australians received Telehealth via satellite services, compared to the 93% of Australians in urban areas that are connected to broadband ADSL networks via optical fibres75. Network latency can cause problems in Telehealth service delivery. Latency from satellites is similar to human reaction times (of approximately 200-250 ms), creating problems for Telehealth applications that require real-time interactions, such as video conferencing. Telehealth and technology access in regional Australia can be critical in emergency situations, however the sustainability and effectiveness of Telehealth for on-going, non-urgent specialist appointments requires further research. A map of Western Australian Telehealth locations is provided in Appendix E.

3.4. COORDINATION ADVANCES

In small, dispersed regional communities, stand-alone transport options often struggle to accommodate the needs of a significant number of users. Regional coordination innovations are required on multiple levels to improve the information available to users and to reduce instances where seniors are required to stay overnight due to no return services 77. The consolidation of multiple transport services and information has proved to be a successful tool to meet demand gaps in dispersed communities78. Community transport is one example of this, and can be defined as a third tier of transport and mobility that fills a need for disadvantaged people within a community without relying on economic profit79. In some rural areas researchers recommend that the future of transport involve a mixture of buses, community transport, taxis and lift-shares with synchronised publicity and reliable services80. Flexible, community and vehicle-sharing transport options are commonly used in small, dispersed towns to fill gaps in public transport provision81. Yet the most successful solutions involve coordination between community transport and resources from local councils, volunteer providers and State Governments81. One example of coordination innovations is Carmarthen Shire County Cars in the United Kingdom that combines the resources of the County Council and the Women’s Royal Voluntary Service, in partnership with 115 local drivers to transport local residents with mobility problems82. Similarly, in Kent and Medway in the UK a combination of transport options are available for elderly people living in rural settings, such as a social car scheme, a dial-a-ride and a community bus twice a week78.

75 Dods et al. 2012 76 National Broadband Network 2016 77 National Centre for Mobility Management 2014 78 Kent County Council 2011 79 Fritze 2008 80 Mackett 2015 81 Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation 2011 82 Steer Davies Gleave and Transept n.d

CASE STUDY 3 – MEATH RURAL TRANSPORT PROGRAMME The Meath Flexibus in Ireland is a door-to-door transport option for anyone in the 92 District Electoral Divisions of Meath County. Starting with two pilot bus services in 1999, the Flexibus service expanded to 21 buses by 2005, with 18 scheduled dial-a-ride services for individuals who could not be catered for by the Flexibus schedule. The coordination of Meath County with the National University of Ireland has not only benefited the implementation of the project but also allowed the University to record travel data and map out all transport options within the region for future research. Although the service is open to anyone in the community, 94% of users are over the age of 55. The focus of Meath County is on creating ‘all-ages-friendly’ services as opposed to ‘aged-friendly’ services, working on the idea of mobility as a catalyst in active ageing and overall life satisfaction for the whole community83. “When I see people confined to the house I know what it means to them to get on the bus, have a laugh, a chat, and get their shopping done. I am amazed at how few opportunities some people have to get out and visit their neighbouring villages not many miles away.” – Peggy, a Flexibus user (McKenna 2006, pg. 3)

3.5. INNOVATIVE MODELS AND CLUSTER HOUSING

Rural transit provides a multitude of challenges for transport agencies and users. The dispersed geography and low population of regional areas demands innovative approaches to address these challenges and provide financially viable and socially beneficial transportation options. An innovative model for regional transport is one that includes new techniques, new approaches, or a modification of a previous practice 84 . Under this definition, the recent Victorian Government focus on a ‘Whole-of-Journey’ approach can be understood as an innovative model in regional Australia. This model involves town planning that is based around transportation and age-friendly communities, with an all-inclusive approach towards independence and ageing-in-place85. Throughout the case studies, one of the most important innovations in regional areas appears to be the ability for a local transport provider to adapt alongside changing demand84. This has proven to be one of the successes of on-demand and flexible community transport in regional and rural Australia. One example of resilience and willingness to adapt is the Tatiara District in South Australia. When bus services were discontinued, the Local Council worked collaboratively with the State Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure to pay the school bus driver a full-time wage in order to drive the school bus between school runs on a timetabled route in the community86. In an aged care context, cluster housing can be understood as a subdivision technique whereby seniors’ accommodation is grouped together, often with a communal space87. Aged -friendly housing is a sustainable community opportunity that can improve the affordability and attractiveness of a town if coupled with improvements to health care facilities and transport options90. Transport provision and cluster housing are interdependent, benefiting aged residents and the wider community if integrated successfully. If not integrated successfully it can lead to increasing social isolation 88. In regional Australia, driving cessation is often associated with depressive symptoms that can be compounded if the individual has little awareness of transport alternatives or lacks experience in using them89. Cartwright’s research

83 McKenna 2006 84 Transit Cooperative Research Program 2011 85 Kendig et al. 2014 86 Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation 2011 87 Jackson 2007 88 Bernoth et al. 2012 89 NRMA Insurance 2010

32

on Australian housing for older people in 2007 found that aged cluster housing in regional towns placed extra stresses on already struggling community and public transport systems. If poorly done, cluster housing could result in mini areas of social disadvantage and limited community integration90. Contrastingly, Australian research suggests cluster housing can be an enabler to improve ease of access to services if transport is integrated into the planning process91. The availability of residential aged care accommodation in regional Australia has been shown to limit social isolation and disconnectedness, with the suggestion that transport can only strengthen the social benefits88.

CASE STUDY 4 – PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE COMMUNITY TRANSPORT Portage la Prairie in Canada has devised innovative solutions to adjust to its ageing population by implementing various different transport schemes whilst also addressing poor quality footpaths and localised mobility issues. Thirty percent of aged residents in Portage live in seniors’ housing clustered around one street block, in an area that is in the opposite end of town to local stores and services92. A local grocery store realised the unmet potential of seniors in a cluster house setting and provided shuttle buses, driven by local volunteers, to and from the shopping centre once a week to cater for seniors in aged housing. The community transport design is currently being altered, with involvement from regular users to encourage a variety of destinations and widening the service to seniors outside of cluster housing. In addition, Portage Service for Seniors Inc. operates a ‘handivan’ for seniors in rural areas with trips running for up to two hours for a cost of $15 to seniors and $0.85 per kilometre for general users93.

3.6. INTERGENERATIONAL & CROSS-CULTURAL INCLUSION IMPACTS

In aged care transport policy and planning there is a tendency to assume older people in regional Australia are a homogeneous group, without recognising the diverse needs and capabilities within the aged population94. Western Australia has a diverse ageing population with seniors now spanning more than four decades and an estimated 20% of persons over 65 being from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds by 202695. Mobility issues are less likely to be associated with physical abilities but rather with social inequalities in class and gender and transport system design94. This creates an additional incentive for community transport as it provides opportunities for volunteerism and social connection. It is also important to acknowledge potential cross-cultural interpretation abilities when marketing different transport options. Multiple advertising avenues are necessary to reach the diverse aged audience in regional Australia in order to benefit more users96. Research indicates that ageing-in-place and keeping seniors connected to social opportunities benefits the whole community in terms of strengthening support systems and vibrancy95. A study in the United Kingdom in 2015 estimated the elderly contribution to society in monetary terms against aged care costs, determining a ratio of $1.29 to $1, respectively. Therefore, for every $1 spent on aged care in the UK in 2015, there was a return of $1.29 in terms of social and economic contribution from seniors. In this study, improving accessibility for older people would be a positive investment in a valuable asset and one that is growing to

90 Cartwright 2007 91 Kendig 2014 92 Allan et al. 2014 93 Portage Community Revitalisation Corporation 2015 94 Murray 2015 95 Department of Local Government and Communities 2013 96 Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation 2011

33

$1.35 to $1 in 203097. All generations benefit from improvements to public transit, from the creation of walkable and safe communities, to multi-generational planning, and opportunities for collaboration across age groups98. Public and community transport is one of the main areas where younger and older people are likely to interact without having met previously99. The NSW Committee on Ageing (2000) recommends that the State Government fund the development and piloting of a new car-sharing scheme to connect older car owners’ needs with younger volunteer drivers. However in regional Australia, paid drivers or volunteers primarily drive community transport services and are usually over 60 years of age100. The Wheatbelt faces the additional challenge of outward migration by younger generations in search of higher education or job opportunities, limiting the number of young people available to volunteer101. Transport is a key ingredient to seniors’ independence, one that is considerably complex and spatially variable and more pronounced in rural areas. The idea of integration and segregation emerges in transport planning for seniors in OECD countries particularly over the last two decades102. One strategy that is commonly used to overcome private transport dependency in regional and rural localities is volunteer transport services, whereby seniors drive other seniors to health care appointments in larger regional centres or cities. This strategy has inherent problems with limited availability of trips in terms of days and times for the volunteer service to operate due to low demand and high costs, as well as few volunteer drivers willing to drive in bad weather102. Inclusiveness in aged transportation options is not easily achieved, with Sharlach and Lehning (2016) pointing out that most US community transport options involve some degree of exclusion for minority groups and generally favour persons of relative socio-economic advantage103.

CASE STUDY 5 – AGE FRIENDLY PHILADELPHIA One case study for a community that has tackled diversity and inclusiveness in aged-friendly transport planning is the strategy for Age-Friendly Philadelphia. The City of Philadelphia utilised the Aging Initiative of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to influence collaboration between multiple fields and disciplines to plan transport policy103. Age-friendly Philadelphia harnessed intergenerational involvement via the interdisciplinary, peer-led network of GenPhilly. The GenPhilly group comprises persons in their 20s and 30s and has grown to over 250 members since its inception in 2009 and brought a renewed focus to sustainable ageing in the city104. This program highlights the important role of younger people working with older generations to create age-friendly environments. One initiative that was developed from this interaction is the Farmers Market transport at Frankford Transportation Center, which makes fresh produce available to older residents and bus users in a neighbourhood with limited fresh food markets105. Over 200,000 Philadelphians over the age of 65 are eligible for the free-ride system on road and rail public transport105. However regional rail trips are not free to older residents, instead they have a reduced fare of only $1 for regional trips105. Intergenerational and inclusionary strategies can serve as opportunities to interact with others and reduce social isolation in older groups104.

97 Mackett 2015 98 Warner et al. 2010 99 Dow et al. 2011 100 New South Wales Committee on Ageing 2000 101 Australian Bureau of Statistics 2015 102 Rosenberg & Everitt 2001 103 O’Hehir 2014 104 Philadelphia Corporation for Ageing 2011 105 Nutter 2016

3.7. SUMMARY

To conclude, it is evident from the international, national and statewide literature reviewed in this paper that there are multiple solutions to regional transportation problems. Based on the literature, there are a number of different solutions that could enable older regional residents to better utilise transport services. Some of the enablers identified in the research include the need for sufficient and sustainable funding as well as uniform, straightforward reimbursement for transport volunteers106. In particular, Australian case studies suggest a higher chance of success when regional transport is planned using a bottom-up approach with stakeholder collaboration, and flexibility is built into the planning process to provide adaptable, individual support107,108

. In a number of regional communities there is a ‘market failure’ where the private sector is not able to provide required transport to meet demand. These areas may benefit from the establishment of a statewide legislative framework for on-demand vehicles and services, and transport drivers 109. Optimising existing resources, maintaining fiscal diversity, embracing technology and providing support for users in multiple forms will all prove essential in the creation of a sustainable, aged friendly transport future in these regional areas. In a Western Australian context, Baby Boomers are expected to be wealthier, healthier, longer-living and more car-dependent than past generations110. Improving mobility creates opportunities for reduced social isolation and a better quality of life for thousands of aged transport users in the Wheatbelt. The surveys and research that follows from the Creating Aged Friendly Community pilot services will further define these recommendations and help determine suitable enablers and solutions for the Wheatbelt.

106 Davison et al 2014 107 Australian Local Government Association 2006 108 Transport for NSW 2013 109 Department of Transport 2015 110 Currie & Delbose 2009

35

4.0 MAP AND GAP ANASLYSIS

4.1. EXISTING ENABLERS AND BARRIERS IN THE WHEATBELT

This section reviews existing aged transport assistance options in regional Western Australia as a means of understanding market gaps as well as the enablers and barriers to accessing appropriate transportation. This includes a summary of existing barriers to regional public transport services, the Patient Assistance Transport Subsidy (PATS), the Home and Community Care (HACC) Program and the Country Age Pension Fuel Card. Through the identification of existing enablers and barriers to elderly transport provision, service providers can better understand how best to improve travel options in regional WA.

4.1.1. REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORT - TRANSWA Personal mobility in the Wheatbelt of Western Australia is almost wholly reliant on private vehicles using the expansive road network 111 . The Wheatbelt operates as the gateway between Perth and the North, South and East of the State, with most of the road and rail infrastructure designed for the transport of agricultural and industrial products112. In terms of passenger transport, Transwa operates three railway services and twenty three bus fleet routes, including eight routes with stops throughout the Wheatbelt43. However, most Transwa bus services are designed for destinations outside of the Wheatbelt (e.g. Albany, Esperance, Augusta, Pemberton, Kalbarri and Geraldton). While these services are valuable to the Region, they do not offer communities from small towns the needed day services to access Wheatbelt regional centres or Perth’s outer metro. There is an opportunity to provide such a service, particularly with the Wheatbelt experiencing an ageing population and service centralisation whereby increasingly older residents in smaller towns are required to travel further to reach many services41. In 2015-16 there were 179,066 recorded boarding’s on regional road coaches and 130 Transwa services running across regional WA every week113. The patronage on the three train services that include stops in the Wheatbelt (Prospector, Avon Link and Merredin Link) was 115,555. In May 2015, 23 new road coaches were commissioned under a $16.3 million contract ($15.1 million from Royalties for Regions). All of these coaches include a wheelchair lift to ensure accessibility for all passengers. This is in addition to the existing coaches that are low floor accessible. 45. Appendix B outlines each of the services that operate within, or through, the Wheatbelt whilst Figure 9 offers a visual map of the services. These services, although expansive, target higher population regional centres and can be inadequate for smaller and geographically isolated locations in the Wheatbelt. The State Government provides discounts to older regional residents, such as driver’s license fee concessions and regional concessions on Transwa services. The State also offers eligible users (holding either a Pensioner Concession Card or a Veterans’ Affairs Gold Card), one free return trip to and from any destination on a Transwa service every two years114. Transwa train patronage recently experienced a decline following the Country Age Pension Fuel Card

111 Wheatbelt Development Commission 2014 112 Regional Development Australia- Wheatbelt 2015 113 Public Transport Authority 2015 114 ConcessionWA 2016

“City dwellers in regional centres have public transport, which is heavily subsidised by the taxpayer, country people have no choice but to use private vehicles.” – Colin Barnett, WA Premier (Strutt 2014, pg. 1)

36

(explained in more detail later in the document) subsidy increase from $500 to $565, and also due to the Department of Transport115 raising the age of the driver’s license renewal test from 75 to 80 years of age.

Figure 9: Transwa Transport System Map. Source: Transwa (2016)

In regional areas a lack of accessible and affordable public transport has been identified as a major issue for older people to remain socially active and independent within and outside of their community116. This is particularly significant for older people who no longer drive or are unable to drive long distances. In a 2012 report, the Department for Communities WA highlighted the need for greater access to reliable and affordable transport in the Wheatbelt. There are currently no regular bus services across the Wheatbelt that provide for day-trips between the region’s small towns and its regional centres or to Perth’s outer metro. During this study there has been an indication from the older population to provide such a service to enable day trips into areas with specialist health and lifestyle services; however this is not possible with the existing services and transport system in place. For example, the Transwa coastal bus service from East Perth to Geraldton runs one-way in both directions every Friday and Sunday. The service is destination-oriented resulting in a lack of day-trip services for those towns between Perth and Geraldton, such as Jurien Bay and Lancelin. There is an opportunity to provide regional public transport that caters to the needs of small regional

115 Parliament of WA 2014 116 Department for Communities 2012

37

towns and the older population in particular, such as scheduled service routes matching medical centre opening hours and same-day return journeys to avoid expensive and time consuming overnight stays. This is partially provided in the Avon/ Merredin Link rail service as the current timetable allows for day commute between regional centres and Perth. An enhanced Avon and MerredinLink service ran on a trial basis funded by Royalties for Regions after a Government decision to cut the service in December 2013 was repealed due to community push back on the loss of the service. After an internal review of the extended service and timetable it was decided that when the trial period was completed (30 June 2017), the service would revert back to the original timetable.

4.1.2. PATIENT ASSISTANCE TRANSPORT SUBSIDY (PATS) Transport support schemes for the elderly vary by State in regional Australia, with the exception of one scheme, Patient Assisted Travel Scheme (PATS), that is implemented throughout the country. The PATS provides a subsidy towards the cost of travel and accommodation for eligible permanent country residents and their approved escorts, who are required to travel a long distance to access certain categories of specialist medical services. This does not include dental or orthodontic services or referrals to allied health professionals, such as physiotherapy, podiatry, audiology or pathology. It does not cover a number of expenses related to attending appointments, such as transport costs for accompanying family members, car parking fees, public transport, meal allowances or rental cars. The scheme differs slightly by State due to varied geographical and social needs. The scheme is funded by Royalties for Regions and administered by WA Country Health Service (WACHS). Features of the Western Australian PATS include the following117:

The eligibility criteria to qualify for a PATS subsidy are especially specific with limited flexibility to meet changing circumstances of regional users. For example, taxi vouchers are not routinely provided77. This assumes that elderly patients in regional areas have access to some form of public or community transport or private vehicle to reach medical appointments in a timely manner, an assumption that is not always correct. The PATS scheme is ideal for those eligible residents who need to access certain categories of specialist medical services such as cancer or dialysis treatment, but does not cater to those that require general services (i.e. general doctor’s appointments, allied health services or social and lifestyle services). There is an opportunity to provide a service that caters to these needs while complimenting the existing PATS scheme.

4.1.3. COUNTRY AGE PENSION FUEL CARD SCHEME Country Age Pension Fuel Cards offer an alternative subsidy scheme on a State level. Fuel cards provide eligible pensioners with up to $565 a year towards the cost of fuel and/or taxi

117 Western Australia Country Health Services 2016

Cancer or dialysis treatment patients who travel 70-100km are eligible for a $20 subsidy;

A private vehicle subsidy of 16c/km for trips over 100km; A group transport vehicle subsidy of 25c/km for trips over 100km; A discounted fare for coach or rail travel for trips over 100km; Applicants who are travelling for cancer treatment and who have to travel by road

for more than 350 Kms from their place of residence are eligible for an aviation travel subsidy;

Private home accommodation subsidy of $20 per night if travelled at least 100km one-way; and

Commercial accommodation subsidy up to $60 per night if travelled at least 100km one-way.

38

travel to support transport needs of pensioners living in country areas118. The initiative is funded by Royalties for Regions and is administered by the Department of Transport with nearly 50,000 users in regional WA in 2014119. To be eligible for a Country Age Pension Fuel Card, the user must meet one of the following criteria:

The fuel card subsidy is a more inclusive scheme than the PATS and provides a form of transport support to rural residents who do not have particular medical conditions. The barriers of the fuel subsidy include the fact that it does not apply to public transport or community transportation, as it is assumed most public transportation already includes concession discounts120. The fuel card is limited to one card per couple each year, with the fixed amount not taking into account geographical location or individual health requirements, thereby penalising people in more remote locations. Similar to the PATS, the fuel card subsidy limits seniors’ mobility by being inflexible to specific circumstances. While the fuel card remains beneficial to eligible residents who have maintained their mobility and ability to drive, the fuel card is less relevant for those without a licence and/or those who live further from regional service centres or the CBD. As more people age-in-place, there will be an increase in those that rely on public transport with day-trip opportunities, particularly as they get into the position of not being able to drive.

4.1.4. HOME AND COMMUNITY CARE PROGRAM (HACC) TRANSPORT SERVICE

The Home and Community Care Program (HACC) is a joint funding initiative of the Commonwealth, WA State Government with operations in WA commencing in 1986121. In WA, HACC operates through the Commonwealth Home Support Program (CHSP) and provides basic maintenance, support and care services for older people to assist them to remain in their homes longer122. The types of services funded by HACC include but are not limited to:

The HACC Transport service is one of ten HACC service groups provided in WA and offers support to older people living in the community to engage in independent activities such as medical appointments, shopping, banking or social engagement. HACC Transport interacts with a suite of other Commonwealth and State funded age care schemes/programs, embedded transport in other HACC programs and other transport schemes such as PATS.

118 Department of Regional Development 2016 119 Strutt 2014 120 Department of Regional Development 2016 121 Department of Health 2013 122 Verso Consulting 2014

Permanent residency in a non-metropolitan area; Centrelink age pension; Disability support pension; Wife pension or widow pension; Social security age pension; or Department of veterans’ affairs service pension.

Domestic assistance; Social support; Nursing care; Personal care; Allied health; Respite care; and Transport.

39

All HACC clients are expected to pay fees as a contribution to their support services. The capacity to pay is based on the clients’ income levels; for those clients who receive multiple supportive services, a HACC Fee Cap is introduced to ensure there is a maximum amount per week paid up to regardless of the level of support received. However, the Fee Cap does not apply to HACC Transport services where separate fees will be charged according to the kilometres travelled. HACC Transport fees are based on the fee levels according to kilometre ranges found in the WA HACC Standard Fees Schedule123. While the HACC Transport program is largely embedded across the available supportive services, it is only available to those who are eligible to receive the HACC services. Fees are charged by the operators of the HACC program coming from the packages that are provided to those who are eligible. The HACC program is also not inclusive of carers unpaid or paid as stated in a review by Verso Consulting (2014), which found that carers who accompanied a client were not able to be included as an output against contracts for the supply of HACC Transport services. This has resulted in an embedded aged transport service beneficial to eligible members who require specific health services, but does not cater to the general older community or their carers who require transport to access general health and lifestyle services. The complexity of transport options available, confusing eligibility criteria which differ across schemes as well as differing cost structures add to the complication of the system within which HACC Transport operates122. Furthermore, in rural and remote locations the options may be significantly limited, varying depending on jurisdictions and/or remoteness122.

4.1.5. EXISTING COMMUNITY BUSES IN THE WHEATBELT The Wheatbelt currently has three Avon Link Working Group feeder bus services that provide regional towns across the Avon and Central East a connecting public transport route between their town and the closest embarking Transwa train service. A feeder bus service currently runs from:

The Goomalling feeder bus service has been running since August 2015 while the Koorda and Mukinbudin feeder bus services were operational in early to mid 2016. All three feeder bus services are scheduled to meet either the Avon Link or Merredin Link train services and are open to public use including concession and standard passengers (Table 5). These services are purposed to provide residents ease of transport to and from Perth or larger regional centres without having to rely on self-drive or other means of private transportation. Table 5: Avon Link Working Group feeder bus services

Avon Link Working Group Feeder Services

Distances (round trip)

Concession Prices (Return)

Concession Price per Km

Standard Prices (Return)

Standard Price per Km

Koorda - Goomalling

200km $12.15 $0.06 $24.30 $0.12

Goomalling - Toodyay

102km $6.05 $0.05 $12.10 $0.11

Koorda - Toodyay

302Km $18.20 $0.06 $36.40 $0.12

123 Department of Health 2013, pg. 2

Koorda to Goomalling, passing through Wyalkatchem and Dowerin; Goomalling to Toodyay to coincide with the Avon Link train service; and Mukinbudin to Merredin to coincide with the Merredin Link train service.

40

Mukinbudin - Merredin

152km $14.15 $0.09 $28.30 $0.18

In addition to these structured services, 19 Local Governments across the Wheatbelt provide the option of community bus hire to their residents and senior residents. These buses are often used for seniors’ activities. An average price for a 100km round trip for senior residents ranges from $52.50 to $180, or $0.52 per km to $1.80 per km. While community bus hire is an available option for some senior residents, there are implications surrounding this option including the need to provide a volunteer driver, organising and scheduling once-off trips and community buses that aren’t well equipped for those with mobility difficultly. Community bus hire, while useful for occasional outings, is not a long-term solution for regular round-trip public transport services in the Region. Appendix C outlines the differing cost of these options between each Local Government.

4.2. SUMMARY

Specific barriers to transport services in the Wheatbelt are outlined in Table 6, along with potential enablers to resolve the issue.

41

Table 6: Existing barriers to transportation in the Wheatbelt and possible solutions or enablers to resolve barriers (according to international, national and regional literature)

124 Wheatbelt Development Commission 2014 125 Wheatbelt Workforce Development Alliance 2012 126 Department of Local Government and Communities 2013 127 Western Australia Country Health Services 2013 128 National Rural Health Alliance 2005 129 Kerschner & Hardin 2006 130 Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation 2011 131 Public Transport Authority 2007 132 Davison et al. 2012 133 Western Australia Country Health Services 2016 134 Horsley & Brewin 2014 135 Osmond et al. 2014

Barriers to Public Transport Services


Accessibility Dispersed population124 Variable population size and density 80 Transwa can’t provide a service to every town in the Wheatbelt125 Distance and proximity to services and regional centre81 Centralisation of government services in regional centres125

Planned and meaningful consultation with communities to meet changing demand and accessibility gaps126

Affordability Potential cost of overnight stays127 Costly service

Uniform and adequate reimbursement128

Frequency Transwa timetables don’t allow for daily return trips129 Adaptive, responsive transport alternatives129 Tailored services only running when required130

Quality Complexity of transport system for new users130 (Un) Awareness of transport system for new users129 Credit card and EFTPOS facilities not available on road coaches131

Multiple education and communication avenues to familiarise new users132

Introduction of electronic payment options where applicable132 Barriers to PATS Issue Potential Enablers to Resolve Barriers Accessibility Inflexible for specific or changing circumstances e.g. residents living

100km-350km from treatment133 Infrequent approval of taxi vouchers134 Long waiting periods134

Support for local volunteer organisations to lead patient transportation135

Clear information and flexible options, available through multiple mediums135

42

136 Department of Regional Development 2016 137 Parliament of WA 2015

Barriers to Country Age Pension Fuel Card Scheme



The fuel subsidy does not apply to public transport or community transportation136

The fuel card does not take into account geographical location The fuel card does not take into account individual health

requirements The fuel card subsidy limits seniors’ mobility by being inflexible to

specific circumstances The fuel card is limited to one card per couple each year

Adjust the monetary value of the Country Age Pension Fuel Card to align with the geographic location of the person to whom it is issued137

Barriers to Home and Community Care Transport Program



Extensive demand for non-emergency health/medical transport Significant difference between States and Territories in terms of

flexibility around categories of specialist medical services Smaller pool of volunteers available to provide community transport

services in the future Transport costs don’t take into account financial needs of carers

Make better use of expertise and services to respond to some of the embedded transport needs

Maintain, support and develop the volunteer base Increase capacity and scale of services to support greater

effectiveness and efficiency Provide clear policy guidelines Provide non-emergency patient transport for residential age

care clients due to diminishing capacity The financial needs of carers should be taken into account

when HACC Transport assessments are being conducted

5.0 EVALUATION OF AGE-FRIENDLY COMMUNITY PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICES

5.1. STUDY AREA

The pilot transport services for this project took place across four of the five Wheatbelt sub-regions (refer to Figure 10) and made the following stops:

In the context of this study, it is important to note that not all regional and urban centres are equal. The three destinations for each pilot transport service offer different amenities and services and therefore meet different needs. Each participating town in the pilot transport service must be understood in terms of comparative isolation, whereby each town is a different distance from a regional centre, has different associated costs and each regional centre has different services available 138 . Table 7 outlines the distance from each participating town to a major health service hub and Appendix F illustrates the differing medical services available at each destination. Table 7: Distance of Pilot Transport Services

Participating Town Distance from Narrogin Hyden 192km Kondinin 134km Kulin 109km Wickepin 39km Participating Town Distance from Joondalup Jurien Bay 195km Cervantes 173km Lancelin 101km Sovereign Hill 61km Woodridge 53km Participating Town Distance from Northam Wongan Hills 96km Calingiri 77km Bolgart 54km

138 Cultural and Indigenous Research Centre Australia 2009

Hyden - Kondinin - Kulin - Wickepin - Narrogin (Wheatbelt South); Jurien Bay - Cervantes - Lancelin - Sovereign Hill - Woodridge - Joondalup

(Central Coast and Metropolitan Perth); and Wongan Hills - Calingiri - Bolgart - Northam (Central Midlands and Avon).

44

Figure 10: Map of pilot transport services and existing Transwa public transport rail and bus services in the Wheatbelt; derived from Transwa data (Public Transport Authority 2016)

Pilot Transport Services and Public Transport Options in the Wheatbelt

5.2. METHODOLOGY

5.2.1. COMPARING SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIFFERENCES Academic literature presents multiple methods for quantifying and comparing socio-economic status between geographical areas139. Comparing socio-economic differences across LGAs is necessary in order to better understand and plan for demand. For example, an LGA with a higher proportion of older residents with a disability may require more specialised transport services. One measure of socio-economic status that has been developed by the Australian Bureau of Statistics is a Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) score that is based on census information for an individual’s area of residence139. SEIFA measures a broad range of socio-economic indices, keeping a baseline measurement of 1,000. A score greater than 1,000 signifies an area of relative socio-economic advantage whereas a score less than 1,000 signifies an area of relative disadvantage. In general terms, a lower SEIFA score corresponds with an overall lower quality of life140. Lower socio-economic groups are more likely to be transport-disadvantaged, pay more for transport, and have longer travel times to access the same services as higher income groups141. Therefore, Australian SEIFA scores are utilised to provide socio-economic context for each town participating in the pilot transport services. A transport-disadvantage classification can include any of the following groups:

Full SEIFA scores and transport disadvantage factors for the Wheatbelt are available in Appendix G.

5.2.2. COMPARING EXCLUSION AND WELLBEING The perceptions of social exclusion and wellbeing of the participants in the pilot services were analysed in order to make a quantitative evaluation of the positive outcomes of the services. Each passenger was asked to complete a community bus participation survey (Appendix A) that asked questions related to quality of life and community inclusion. The results are presented in the following sections and underpin the economic recommendations for the service. The concepts of fulfilment, happiness and contentedness, often used in relation to wellbeing, are not absolute terms; instead they are relative and subjective. The wellbeing of a person or a group can be further broken down into categories of social, physical and emotional wellbeing142. Importantly, it should be noted that each of these categories are based on a mix of normative goals, such as safety or nutrition, or on a subjective assessment by the individual on their own happiness 143. As a result, when subjective opinions and personal contexts change, so do the reference points for discerning one’s quality of wellbeing. Thus context is fundamental in understanding and evaluating the relationship between wellbeing and rural transport. 139 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2016 140 Western Australia Country Health Service 2012 141 Dodson et al. 2006 142 Diener 1985 143 Nordbakke & Schwanen 2014

Low-income people; Children and youth; Elderly; Regional and rural residents; Beneficiaries and/or unemployed; Women; Disabled; and Ethnic minorities141.

46

Social exclusion and inclusion have been widely studied within a number of disciplines and is understood to be critical in determining an individual’s quality of life and sense of wellbeing144. The UK government’s Social Exclusion Unit has examined social exclusion in relation to poor mobility options 145. Broadening the measure of disadvantage to include social exclusion identified that physical disability, ageing, or lack of education may limit an individual’s capacity to participate in social, political or economic activities. Transport is an essential component to understanding exclusion since a lack of access to quality and affordable transport inhibits an individual’s ability to engage in society. Mobility is central to rural activity and there is a direct link between community wellbeing and the availability of rural transport options146. Good rural transport infrastructure not only supports an individual’s autonomy and social connectedness but also has wider social benefits for the whole community143. This aligns with the survey findings which reveal that older passengers relied on the pilot services to fulfil various social and health needs. Additionally, some users explicitly expressed a sense of personal gain in regards to their autonomy and freedom, as a direct result of the services. This suggests that for the given timeframe and context, the pilot transport services positively impacted the social, physical and emotional wellbeing of the participants. Lastly, the impact of rural transport on health and physical wellbeing is also crucial to understand the overarching impacts on overall wellbeing. Within many rural communities, such as those involved in the pilot services, older inhabitants have problems with access to health specialists and services147. A 2011 study conducted in NSW on the delivery of health transport services by community transport providers, found that the number of trips almost tripled from 240,000 in 1996 to 680,000 trips in 2006. Interestingly the study found that proportionally, members of rural communities make less health-related trips when compared with urban communities. That being said, rural communities undertook more trips overall, with older members performing the most147.

5.2.3. ECONOMIC EVALUATION Undertaking a robust economic appraisal for the provision of community transport in regional and rural settings is a challenge, not least because many welfare factors are difficult to quantify. Nevertheless, a number of US case studies have attempted to measure the value of a ‘forgone trip’ and have reported benefit-cost ratios in the order of 3:1 to 9:1148. The dis-benefits incurred when a trip for medical purposes is foregone carry the highest value. Southerworth et al. (2005) 149 estimate a value of US$44.86 for the provision of a non-emergency medical trip (approximately AU$77 in 2016). This high cost is in part due to the regulation that public transit operators must provide para-transit services to disabled passengers not able to access the current scheduled service150. However, they note that the results are sensitive to differing circumstances of the passenger or the type of treatment forgone. The value of social and shopping trips were approximately half the value of medical trips (AU$40 in current terms). The US studies typically addressed regional centres with far greater populations than the Wheatbelt communities analysed in this report. Elderly residents in Australian rural towns are particularly vulnerable to social exclusion due to low incomes and poor social networks151 and poor levels of access to transport152. However, delivering transport alternatives for such small

144 Stanley and Vella-Brodrick 2009 145 Social Exclusion Unit 2003 146 Shergold, 2012 147 Cancer Council 2011 148 Godavarthy et al. 2014 149 Southworth et al. 2005 150 Battellino & McClain 2011 151 Dempsey 1990 152 Byles et al. 2007

47

communities can carry a relatively high per passenger cost. Despite this, Battelino et al. (2011)150 note that flexible community-based transport, as adopted in NSW, are a lower cost option than the US model and require lower subsidies. The cost of the service for the North Sydney, NSW, trial was AU$25 per person (approximately AU$30 in current values). No benefit calculation was provided by this study. A thorough cost benefit study would aim to capture money equivalences for mental wellbeing, the benefits due to physical activity, the potential community savings in delivery of health services, as well as the wider impacts due to greater economic activity within the community150. However, due to the low number of responses received in the pilot survey (19 respondents) it is impossible to estimate parameters from the data. The following analysis is based on Stanley et al. (2011) examination of the marginal rate of substitution (MRS) between the number of daily trips and the daily household income. The MRS, in this context, can be understood as the rate at which a passenger is ready to give up one good or service in exchange for another good or service whilst maintaining the same level of utility. In the Stanley et al. (2011) paper the authors specifically looked at the value of a trip in terms of alleviating levels of social exclusion, a similar context to the Wheatbelt study. The parameters were estimated using an ordered logit regression where the dependent variable was the self-reported social level of exclusion. The average MRS of $20 per trip is determined by ratio between the marginal benefit (reduction in level of exclusion) of an additional dollar of income to the marginal benefit of an additional trip. However, the authors argue that lower income households place a higher value on an additional trip because they are more likely to be making few trips: “Our interpretation is that, in our sample, people on lower incomes take fewer trips. If we can add a trip, this is a large relative increase in mobility and associated activity levels and a relatively high willingness to pay is not surprising, compared to the marginal trip value of someone who undertakes more trips (and has higher income)” (page 214). The relationship between income and the value of an additional trip (MRS) is reproduced in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Marginal Rate of substitution between an additional trip and daily household income (Source: Figure 1 Stanley et al. 2011. Page 214) Whilst, Stanley et al. (2011)153 examined all households on the outer fringes of metropolitan Melbourne, the community trial presented here is targeted at seniors in regional areas. Fifteen of the 19 surveys were completed by respondents older than 65 years of age. Furthermore, the residents of the Western Australian rural towns had lower incomes than average reported

153 Stanley et al. 2011

($)

48

in Stanley et al. The 2011 census data revealed that the average daily household incomes in Kondinin and Wickepin are $87 and $71, respectively. It is expected that the elderly passengers undertaking the Wheatbelt pilot services would have lower than average incomes, but no income data was sought. The community bus trial targeted members of the public that otherwise relied on family or friends to undertake long distance trips. Most respondents indicated that the provision of the community bus service increased the frequency of making the trip to the regional centre. In total, these factors point to a higher value of an additional trip for the Wheatbelt target population than for the population residing in the outer fringes of Melbourne. A conservative estimate of $40 per person trip is arrived at by assuming a $100 per day income as shown by the dashed line in Figure 11. However, this is considered to be a minimum value, based on income alone. The other factors, including infrequent travel to regional centres, relying on family members, accessing medical services and the social value of the trip, suggest a higher welfare benefit. MRS is often referred to as willingness to pay. However, the concept does not translate directly to capacity to pay. In micro-economic terms willingness to pay is equated to income equivalence. This is the amount of income – which may be in the form of other subsidised services – an individual is willing to forgo to receive the benefit of the community transport. From a policy perspective, this is the level playing field used to prioritise social investments. An alternative way of looking at income equivalence is the willingness to accept, which is the amount of income (possibly through subsidised services) required to compensate the individual for removing the community bus. The trip provided by the community bus is considered to be an additional trip as it enables passengers to travel without the assistance of other family members. Additionally, in this rural setting, the fact that passengers report difficulty to make a trip to the regional centre without assistance makes the value of the community bus considerably higher than in an urban setting where there are more opportunities. However, a conservative estimate of this value is prudent, since access to a like-for-like case is limited. For the pilot bus service, it is assumed that monetary equivalence for passengers without mobility difficulty is $40 per additional trip, while $55 per trip benefit for passengers with slight mobility difficulty and $70 per trip for passengers with mobility difficulty. The higher figures take into account the time for family members to assist with transport needs and the fact that respondents with restricted mobility reported some difficulty in attending medical appointments. Based on the survey responses that indicated an equal proportion for each mobility group, an average value of $55 for the assumed willingness to pay was determined. The breakeven demand is such that the economic benefit derived by the passengers is equal to the cost of the services. The analysis presented in sections 5.3.3, 5.4.3 and 5.5.3 adopts the MRS estimate to identify the breakeven number of passengers for each of the three community trials. This is achieved by calculating the total benefits for the passengers on board (i.e. $55 per passenger) and subtracting the cost of the service. In keeping with the customary presentation of benefits to cost inquiries, we present the analysis as a ratio. The breakeven demand is when the ratio equals one. A benefit to cost ratio above one indicates that the benefits outweigh the cost. Acknowledging the difficulty of putting a dollar value to social and mental wellbeing benefits, a sensitivity analysis is used to test the robustness of the breakeven ratio to the assumed MRS value of $55. Figure 12 illustrates a general breakeven and sensitivity analysis to be applied to each of the three pilot surveys.

49

The breakeven point is when the accrued welfare for the passengers is equal to the total cost of the service. In Figure 12 this is presented as the line when the benefit to cost ratio is equal to one. The analysis given is a function of the number of passengers on board per trip. There has been no attempt to investigate a longer time horizon (i.e., net present value analysis) because it appears that the program will not include capital outlay on a new bus. The solid blue line indicates the total welfare for the passengers using the base MRS of $55 per passenger, showing a breakeven point for around six passengers. The dashed lines indicate the sensitivity of the breakeven point if the assumed MRS per passenger is lower ($40) or higher ($70).

Figure 12: Illustration of breakeven and sensitivity analysis

50

5.3. HYDEN TO NARROGIN PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE

5.3.1. CONTEXT Population and socio-economic data is fundamental for understanding common trends and for informing future transport and service needs in the area. The Wheatbelt South has one of the oldest population profiles in the Region with 16% of the population over the age of 65, exceeding the State average of 12.3%. With the economic capacity to support 7,000 additional residents, the Sub-region is projected to have a total population of 22,500 persons by 2036154. The existing population is concentrated around Narrogin, the regional centre for the Sub-region. This pilot transport service targets the 347 residents over 65 across the Kondinin, Kulin and Wickepin LGAs. The relative older median age of each community is compared to the State and National median age in Figure 13.

Figure 13: Median age of participating pilot communities, compared to the State and National averages (2011)

With the first of the Baby Boomer generation reaching the age of 65 in 2010, this cohort will continue to underpin demand for a range of age care services, including hospitals, allied health services, housing and transport 154 . The Narrogin Hospital is heavily used in the Wheatbelt South for emergency services, with a tendency for ancillary aged care services to be delivered close to Narrogin as it has greater capacity to support aged residents. This has led to a comparatively higher concentration of people over 65 years of age now residing in Narrogin Town154. With a lack of critical population mass in individual Shires, a new service delivery model is needed as surrounding communities move towards encouraging older residents to age-in-place154. A priority issue for each participating Shire in this pilot transport service is the establishment of an outreach-based age care service delivery network to provide residents with an opportunity to stay in their community without placing an economic burden on individual Local Governments. An independent economic analysis conducted by RPS consultants into the health and educational opportunities in the Wheatbelt identified the Shires of Kondinin and Wickepin as having a disadvantage in the health and education sectors and the Shire of Kulin having potential to be so in the coming decade, as seen in Figure 14. Therefore the spatial distribution of health and aged care services cannot exist equally across towns. Dispersed

154 Wheatbelt South Sub-Regional Economic Strategy 2014

51

health and age care services means that transport infrastructure is necessary to connect isolated populations with service clusters. The legend for Figure 14 is as follows:

Figure 14: Spatial distribution of health and education opportunities for the Wheatbelt South Sub-Region. Source: Wheatbelt Development Commission (2014)

The Local Government areas for this pilot transport service have a combined average SEIFA score of ~994 placing them at relative socio-economic disadvantage compared to the rest of the State and Australia. The Shire of Kulin was the only Shire in this pilot transport service that scored above the baseline figure with a value of 1011, compared to Kondinin’s score of 993 and 977 for Wickepin. Participating Local Government areas have a comparatively lower proportion of female residents (46%) compared to the greater Wheatbelt (47%) and State average (49%). Similarly, the Shires have a higher proportion of Australian-born residents, with 84% of residents born in Australia, compared to 81% in the Wheatbelt and 62% in Western Australia as a whole. Having comparatively fewer women and ethnic minorities in the area than the State implies a lower likelihood of the population experiencing transport disadvantage155. On the other hand, having a higher proportion of elderly residents, a regional location and a lower

Solid blue circle – The town has an above average competitive advantage in the health and education sector and/or has existing activity leveraging this opportunity;

Dotted blue circle – The town has the potential to have an above average competitive advantage in the health and education sector (due to either changing or emerging drivers) over the next decade;

Grey circle – The town does not have an above average competitive advantage in the relevant sector; and

Blue font – The town is participating in the Pilot Transport Study.

52

average income (per person, per week) of $548, compared to $662 for Western Australia, creates an environment that can be detrimental to mobility and accessibility.

5.3.2. IMPLEMENTATION In 2015, all participating Local Governments in this pilot transport service agreed that the Kondinin community bus would be used for the pilot service. The service ran fortnightly on a Thursday setting off from Kondinin and collecting pre-booked passengers in Hyden (if applicable), Kulin and Wickepin on the way to Narrogin. The return service set off once the day’s activities were completed155. The timetable was set as per Table 8 with the cost of the service set at $15 per person for a return trip from Hyden, $10 per person for a return trip from Kondinin and Kulin, and $5 for a return trip from Wickepin. Service requirements included having to book by midday the day prior to the service running and having a maximum of two shopping bags per passenger. All information was publically available in the form of a community flyer (see Appendix H) and was distributed at Shire offices and in community newsletters. Prior to the service running there was a mailbox drop for residents in the Shire of Kondinin and a local newspaper advertisement, with posters displayed on Shire noticeboards for the duration of the pilot service. Table 8: Hyden to Narrogin Pilot Transport Service schedule

Runs fortnightly on Thursdays

Hyden to Narrogin Narrogin to Hyden Hyden 8:00am Narrogin 3:00pm Kondinin 8:40am Wickepin 3:40pm Kulin 9:15am Kulin 4:25pm Wickepin 10:00am Kondinin 4:55pm Narrogin 10:40am Hyden 5:30pm

Feedback on the service was provided through an informal interview with the bus driver, conducted by a WDC representative during the final pilot service trip. Four regular bus users also provided feedback. A question guide (see Appendix I) was used to steer the conversation and elicit feedback on what the users thought was managed effectively or what could have been better managed.

5.3.3. FINDINGS The key findings from the Hyden to Narrogin pilot service were as follows156:

Through passenger and bus driver surveys it was suggested that promoting the service to the entire community, not just the older residents, could increase demand. Some older residents were reluctant to use the service because they were concerned about their mobility at the destination point. Demand was low in Kulin and Hyden, with suggestions that Hyden could be 155 Kulin Shire Council 2015 156 Note: For this Strategy, all respondents will be kept anonymous

Most users were female and over the age of 60; The most common reason for travel was for medical or social reasons; The majority of users were very happy with the service and wanted it to continue; It was felt that advertising and awareness of the service could be improved; Some passengers would be willing to pay more for the service for it to continue; The obliging nature and dedication of the bus driver enhanced the experience for

many users and was critical to the success of the service; and The school holiday periods were very quiet and it is not worthwhile running the

service during this time.

53

omitted from future routes. The service was perceived as affordable and the collection of passengers from their homes was highlighted as being helpful. Suggested future improvements included making the service monthly rather than fortnightly, and expanding the promotion of the service to cover whole community. All passengers believed that over time the service would become more viable as the population ages and as more support services cluster around Narrogin. The lack of alternative options or transport at the given destination was a negative, with suggestions that linking destination transport, local events and functions would aid in improving the service. Whilst the price was considered fair, the need to subsidise the service for some users was raised. Furthermore, it was noted that having a dedicated paid driver was important to the success of the service. It was acknowledged that a simple and effective booking system reduced the time required to manage the service. The only comparable service that exists in the communities was HACC; however non-HACC members were unable to access these services. Whilst affordability concerns were not specifically raised, it was suggested that the service should be funded by the State in partnership with Local Governments and that collaborations should be made with HACC in the future.

The service cost breakdown of the Hyden to Narrogin pilot service is presented in Table 9. A cost benefit analysis was carried out to determine the number of passengers required to breakeven. Assuming an MRS of $55 (i.e., per person trip benefit), the number of passengers required for the economic benefits to exceed the costs is at least six passengers. A sensitivity analysis shows the degree to which the breakeven passenger number is affected by the assumption of MRS between income and the value of the trip. The sensitivity graph shown in Figure 15 indicates that to exceed a benefit-cost ratio of one, the number of passengers would need to be eight, if a low estimate of benefit per person trip is assumed. For a high estimate of the monetary equivalence, five passengers per service are required. The range of five to eight passengers for economic viability is reasonable. The level of subsidy is approximately 80% when six passengers travel. All operational data for this service is available in Appendix J. Table 9: Service cost for Hyden to Narrogin Pilot Service

Route Trip distance (Km)

Operation cost ($ per trip)

Maintenance and repairs ($ per trip)

Bus depreciation ($ per trip)

Total cost $ per trip

Round trip between Hyden and Narrogin

280km $270 $42 $8 $320

“Great service for me because I don’t like driving long distances by myself…it provides an excellent service for our community both socially and medically” – Passenger Ten

54

Figure 15: Marginal Rate of substitution between Number of Daily Trips and Daily Household Income in Round trip between Hyden and Narrogin

The pilot service round trip fare from Hyden to Narrogin was $10, representing one fifth of the total service cost when six passengers use the service. The results in Table 10 outline the influence of increasing the fare on the required subsidy for the service to run. The fare option 2 (doubling the current fares) may represent a reasonable balance between the passengers’ capacity to pay and the benefit they receive from the service. This is in line with survey comments where passengers expressed a willingness to pay a little more than the current price if it meant keeping the service running. Table 10: Break-even point of passenger numbers in Round trip between Hyden and Narrogin shown in red circle.

Assuming Fare option 2 is chosen, the subsidy represents 85% of the total cost. Table 11 shows both the required subsidy levels as well as the benefit to cost ratio for 50% and 100% growth in the average number of passengers. It is evident that the service becomes more economically justifiable and financially sustainable with a higher level of patronage.

Fare Service cost Average Passenger Number=5 Fare Benefits WDC Subsidy

Fare option 1

Hyden and Kondinin

$10 $320 $37.5 $282.5

Wickepin $5 Fare option 2

Hyden and Kondinin

$20 $75 $245


Hyden and Kondinin

$30 $112.5 $207.5


Hyden and Kondinin

$40 $150 $170

Wickepin $20

“The service provided is of a high standard and our bus driver is most helpful” – Passenger Thirteen

55

Table 11: Sensitivity analysis of passenger number in Round trip between Hyden and Narrogin

Route Fare Service cost

Passenger Number=5

Passenger Number=7

Passenger Number=10

Fare Revenue Subsidy Fare

Revenue Subsidy Fare Revenue Subsidy

Hyden to

Narrogin

Hyden and

Kondinin $20 $320 $75 $245 $105 $215 $150 $170

Wickepin $10 Benefit to cost ratio 0.9 1.2 1.7

This service was highly valued by the passengers, with most perceiving the service to enable residents to remain independent by helping them access essential services and stay socially connected. Several passengers commented on positive elements of the service including the flexibility and courtesy of the bus driver and the comfort of the journey. One passenger discussed how her husband previously drove her to Narrogin but since he passed away a few months earlier, she has had to re-schedule several appointments due to high fuel costs and low confidence in driving alone. Many single or widowed older female respondents did not feel they had anyone to drive them to appointments or felt they would be a burden on family members or friends if they asked for a lift to Narrogin.

56

Theme

Barriers

Recommen-dations

Promotion of Service

Unclear advertising1

Expand on advertising avenues e.g. mailbox drop1

More promotion about services at destination1

Route

Inconvenient to drive longer distance for occasional passengers in Hyden1,2

Revaluate starting destination1

Occasionally change destination1

Eligibility

Uncertainty of what ages were eligible to use the service1

Expand eligibility to whole community2,3

Organisational Support

Lack of mobility aids available at destination2

Lack of coordination with community events1,2

Link service with local events1

Provide mobility aids2

Collaborate with HACC providers2

Interpersonal Relations

Some community members not taking the pilot service seriously1

Friendly and flexible bus driver1,3

Figure 16: Barrier and Recommendation Table. 1 = identified by passengers, 2 = identified by bus driver, 3 = identified by Shire

5.4. JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE

5.4.1. CONTEXT The Central Coast Sub-regional population is rapidly ageing with 18.2% of the population being over the age of 65. Figure 17 shows the median age of each participating community compared to the State and National median age. This pilot transport service provided an opportunity for the 559 older residents in the Shire of Dandaragan and the 884 older residents in the Shire of Gingin to travel to Joondalup for high order services. In early 2016 two Community Forums were held in both Jurien Bay and Gingin where the issue of inadequate public transport was raised157. The greatest demand for public transport was north-south travel with Perth as the destination, there being little demand to travel inland for services157. A previous community survey in Jurien Bay revealed that the majority of respondents felt transportation options to major destinations were generally poor. One respondent commented that, “Community buses for each town would be good and would encourage more interaction between towns157”. Forty-five percent of survey respondents in Jurien Bay and 66% of respondents in Gingin stated that they were either very dissatisfied or dissatisfied with transportation options and mobility in their Shire157,158

. The Central Coast has high automobile dependency, making travel very difficult for residents without a car or without the ability to drive. This can limit access to specialty health services and social amenities for older residents and negatively impact their quality of life159.

Older residents in the Central Coast have highly variable experiences and limiting factors in terms of access to services across the Sub-region157. The community highlighted a distinct lack of assisted transport options for seniors. Currently in the Sub-region there are a number of groups with no access to community buses or the HACC services due to strict eligibility criteria157. One respondent commented, “if you can’t drive or [are] physically unable to walk – then you are stuck at home – isolated!”158. A second individual commented on the community bus owned by the Shire of Gingin, saying that the process for booking this bus was “inaccessible for most in the community due to either ability to access without hassle” or the “cost of usage being too high”158. In another survey carried out by the Shires the main suggestions were158:

The Jurien Bay Age Friendly Community Plan and the Gingin Age Friendly Community Plan both found the same priority objective: to ensure all seniors have access to safe and consistent transport options. Actions to achieve this objective involve continuing exploration and support of regional transport issues that impact the ability of people to age in place157,158.

157 Shire of Dandaragan 2016 158 Shire of Gingin (2016), Age Friendly Community Plan 159 Dodson et al. 2006

Improve the viability of a community bus network through private business partnerships;

A community bus day-trip option to and from Joondalup; and Make transport affordable for persons on limited income.

58

Figure 17: Median age of participating pilot communities, compared to the State and National averages (2011).

The Local Government areas for the Jurien Bay to Joondalup pilot transport service have a combined average SEIFA score of ~997, placing them at relative socio-economic disadvantage compared to the rest of the State and Australia but slightly higher than the Hyden to Narrogin pilot transport service score. The Shire of Dandaragan scored just above the baseline figure with 1003, compared to the Shire of Gingin’s score of 992. Lower socio-economic groups are more likely to be transport disadvantaged and pay more for transport, as well as have longer travel times to access the same services as higher income groups160. Participating Local Government areas have the same proportion of female residents as the greater Wheatbelt (47%) and slightly less than the State average (49%). Interestingly, the proportion of females in these Shires drops down to 44% for persons over the age of 65, noticeably lower than the State average for this age bracket with females representing 53% of older residents. The Central Coast has a lower percentage of residents born in Australia at 72%, compared to the Wheatbelt average of 81%, but is still higher than the State average of 62%. Similar to the Hyden to Narrogin demographics analysis, the Shires of Dandaragan and Gingin have comparatively fewer women and fewer people from ethnic minorities in the area than the State. This would imply less transport disadvantage in the Region160. However the higher proportion of elderly residents, the regional geography and the lower average income (per person, per week) of $522.50 across the Sub-region compared to $662 in Western Australia as a whole, creates an environment that can limit older residents’ access to services.

5.4.2. IMPLEMENTATION Following the findings in the Jurien Bay Age Friendly Community Plan and the Gingin Age Friendly Community Plan, one of the immediate actions from both Shires was to engage in this pilot transport service in collaboration with the WDC and actively communicate any findings from the running of the pilot service for use in the Local Transport Plan. This pilot transport service was the only service (of the three) that used a private transport provider. The bus for this pilot service was provided and run by a private local business, Jurien Bay Adventure Tours, with both LGA’s playing a joint role in the marketing and bookings for the service. The timetable was set as per Table 12. The cost of the service was set at $25 per person for a return trip from Jurien Bay and Cervantes, $20 from Lancelin and $15 from 160 Dodson et al. 2006

59

Sovereign Hill and Woodridge. The Shires of Gingin and Dandaragan agreed to cover the costs of any unfilled seats up to a maximum of eight seats in total per service; however if 12 seats were sold the Local Governments were not required to make a contribution. By underwriting up to eight unsold seats per service at the agreed fare, both Local Governments were incentivised to sell tickets, including marketing and awareness techniques to their local communities. Passenger requirements for taking part in the service included having to book by midday the day prior to using service. This information was made available to the public in a flyer (see Appendix K), distributed at Shire offices as well as in community newsletters. There is only one comparable existing service in the Region, with a Transwa bus and Integrity Coach Lines running one-way from Perth to Jurien Bay for approximately $44. For seniors with a concession card the return trip to Joondalup from Jurien Bay costs $41.30 ($82.50 for standard users). However, Transwa bus service timetables do not allow for older residents to receive return day-trips, with the bus services only arriving in Perth at 3pm on Fridays and 10pm on Sundays. Table 12: Jurien Bay to Joondalup Pilot Transport schedule

Runs weekly on Mondays (or Wednesday if Monday is a public holiday)

Jurien Bay to Joondalup Joondalup to Jurien Bay Jurien Bay 7:00am Joondalup Health Campus 4:15pm Cervantes 7:20am Lakeside Joondalup

Shopping Centre 4:25pm

Lancelin 8:30am Woodridge 5:15pm Sovereign Hill 9:10am Sovereign Hill 5:30pm Woodridge 9:20am Lancelin 6:00pm Lakeside Joondalup Shopping Centre

10:15am Cervantes 6:40pm

Joondalup Health Campus

10:25am Jurien Bay 7:00pm

5.4.3. FINDINGS The key findings from the Jurien Bay to Joondalup pilot service were as follows:

The Shire of Gingin sold 94 out of 132 tickets (71.2%) over the 22-week pilot period;

According to the operator, the ticket price was “cheap” yet very reasonably priced for elderly passengers. Future improvements should include a structured price system whereby the price

Most of the passengers were female, with the majority being over the age of 65; Woodridge was the most common pick-up point; There is strong demand for the service throughout the year, with many

passengers relying on it for ongoing specialist medical appointments; The number of passengers increased over time as more people became aware of

the service; Family catch ups have become common as the drop off point at the bus/train

station offers an easy commute to other suburbs of Perth;

There was a very strong desire from passengers for the service to continue; Rain and stormy weather was associated with lower passenger numbers; The social aspect and the enjoyment from meeting new people was highlighted

as a big draw card to use the service; and More targeted advertising of the service is needed.

60

of the service is related to the age bracket of the user. Table 13 presents a service cost breakdown for the Jurien Bay to Joondalup service. The estimated cost is around $880 per trip for the Jurien Bay to Joondalup leg. The higher operating cost, coupled with no additional fare recovery ($10 per passenger), leads to a break-even passenger head count of sixteen per trip. The fare subsidy requirement exceeds 80%. Table 13: Service cost for Jurien Bay to Joondalup Pilot Service

Figure 18 illustrates a break-even point of sixteen passengers assuming $55 trip benefits per person. The sensitivity results also suggest that twenty-two passengers are needed, to ensure the benefit-cost ratio surpasses one, assuming a low estimate ($40) of the trip benefit per person. In terms of a high estimate of trip benefit, thirteen passengers per bus service are required. For the round trip between Jurien Bay and Joondalup, passenger number ranges from thirteen to twenty-two would be reasonable due to the long trip length.

Figure 18: Marginal Rate of substitution between Number of Daily Trips and Daily Household Income in Round trip between Jurien Bay and Joondalup

The results in Table 14 show the relationship between fare prices and required subsidy for the Jurien Bay to Joondalup route. Fare option 2 ($40 for passengers from Jurien Bay and $20 for passengers from Sovereign Hill) represents a reasonable fare charge, which balances the passengers’ capacity to pay and the benefit they receive from the service. Some passengers from Jurien Bay indicated that they were willing to pay $40 per trip; however, in this case they would be willing to make one trip per fortnight. This reveals that although they place a high value on the service they are nonetheless conscious of budget constraints. The survey design did not accommodate for a price and demand relationship but undoubtedly there is one and pricing decisions will need to consider the relatively low income of the target group.






Round trip between Jurien Bay and Joondalup (est.)

427km $540 $90 $250 $880

Table 14: Fares for current passenger number in Round trip between Jurien Bay and Joondalup

Fare Service cost Current Passenger Number =7 Fare Benefits Government

Subsidy Fare option 1

Jurien Bay $30 $880 $157.5 $722.5 Sovereign Hill $15

Fare option 2

Jurien Bay $40 $210 $670 Sovereign Hill $20

Fare option 3

Jurien Bay $50 $262.5 $617.5 Sovereign Hill $25

Fare option 4

Jurien Bay $60 $315 $565 Sovereign Hill $30

Assuming Fare option 2 is chosen, the subsidy represents 76% of the total cost of the service. Table 15 shows both the required subsidy levels and the benefit to cost ratio if passenger numbers increase 50% 100% and 200%. A higher demand of passengers enables the bus service to become more sustainable and beneficial.

Table 15: Sensitivity analysis of passenger number in Round trip between Jurien Bay and Joondalup


Passenger Number=7

Passenger Number=10

Passenger Number=14

Passenger Number=21

Fare Revenue Subsidy Fare

Revenue Subsidy Fare Revenue Subsidy Fare

Revenue Subsidy

Jurien Bay to

Joondalup

Jurien Bay $40

$880 $210 $670 $300 $580 $420 $460 $630 $250 Sovereign Hill $20

Benefit to cost ratio 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.3 In regard to bringing the two Local Government Areas (LGA’s) together to jointly run the Central Coast pilot transport, the following observations were made:

The service was considered a fantastic social opportunity by almost every survey respondent and provided a space to meet new people. This service was highly valued by the passengers that used it and was considered a very important aspect in allowing people to remain independent and socially active whilst accessing essential health services. All survey respondents wanted the service to continue as it had become a weekly social outing that they looked forward to. Likewise, it was mentioned that the service enabled older residents to take part in more activities and access more services than previously. Multiple passengers actively tried to recruit more passengers in an attempt to fill the bus. Following the final pilot service,

There were skill level differences between the two LGA’s; There were different skill sets between the LGA’s that could be better utilised in

the future; There was an uneven FTE input between the LGA’s which created an imbalance

between the LGA’s capabilities. A future opportunity would include defining LGA’s roles in the project to encourage efficiency and team work; and

The LGA’s worked at a different pace and experienced different pressures.

“Since the bus service commenced [in] early April, I have made a new circle of friends and we all look forward for our get-together each Monday… I am very happy with the service (as I don’t drive).” – Passenger Nine

62

key benefits discussed by passengers revolved around freedom, independence and flexibility. Some of the positive features of the service that were highlighted included:

The pilot service created a sense of community amongst regular passengers. Individual stories of friendship and independence emerged over the 22 weeks that the service was trialled: one passenger brought along their grandson on his 13th birthday and all the passengers put in $2 to buy doughnuts and sang him happy birthday. Another group of female passengers made an effort to catch the free CAT buses and local Transperth buses in and around Joondalup and wrote down how to get to endpoints such as Spotlight, Bunnings or X-Ray services. This information was then distributed to new passengers. Two passengers mentioned that they had never been to Joondalup prior to the service running, and many users stated that they were previously reliant on family and friends to drive them to appointments. For example, Passenger Four said that for “years we have been waiting for a community bus for our town and the whole Shire… [Before this service] my friend would take me to appointments.” For residents who frequently travelled to Joondalup they commented that fuel costs were “a pain” and that this service provided a more enjoyable and affordable alternative. Whereas Passenger Five had an unexpected appreciation of the service as a relaxing day to themselves, offering welcome respite from their responsibilities as a full-time carer.

It is evident from the survey responses that without this service, many older residents would not make the journey into Joondalup or Perth. Transwa bus timetables that are more suited to Geraldton-Perth commutes, as well as no day-trip options result in a simple trip to specialist appointments becoming an expensive three-day commute. Paying for two nights’ accommodation for weekly or fortnightly appointments is not a viable or sustainable option for senior citizens, particularly for individuals with the Australian age pension as their sole income. This became apparent when one passenger used the last pilot service (August 29) to purchase their Christmas shopping, due to the fear that they would not get another opportunity to visit Perth. The demand for an affordable day-trip service was clear after the final pilot service when the pilot passengers presented a petition with 38 signatures to the Shire of Gingin (see Appendix L and Appendix M). Over the course of the pilot service, three different bus models were trialled to determine passenger preferences. One of the only passenger complaints followed the use of a side-seating bus, as many passengers felt carsick and did not like facing each other for such a long journey. This pilot service had some unexpected flow-on benefits as a result of running the service. One example involved a 58-year-old Jurien Bay resident approaching the bus driver to enquire about working with Jurien Bay Adventure Tours. The resident was then employed as a driver for the pilot service. A second benefit of the pilot service was the Shire of Dandaragan and the Shire of Gingin continuing to work together on other projects in the Central Coast Sub-region.

Very short waiting time; Friendly nature of the bus driver and his willingness to help passengers with

individual needs; Good pick-up and drop-off locations, easy for most users to access; and Good opportunity to meet new people and make new friends.

“[The service] has given me a day to myself, for me to enjoy and meet other people from various communities in the Shire. [Being] able to have a carer for husband for most of the time out gives me peace of mind… [I] hope this service continues as I didn’t realise how much a day out without [my] invalid husband was so beneficial” – Passenger Seven

63

Theme

Barriers

Recommen-dations


Advertising missed residents who were not active in the community1

Advertise to residents in surrounding towns1

Repeat marketing in newspapers1

Operation

Steps onto the bus were difficult for some passengers1

Bus was not suitable to all users1,2

Extra steps for boarding bus2

Accomodate wheelchair access2

More frequent toilet and food breaks1

Eligibility

Uncertainty of what ages were eligible to use the service1

Expand eligibility to whole community1,2,3

Financial Support

Have the service sponsored into the future to keep the price affordable and secure1

Structure price system whereby persons under the age of 50 pay slightly higher fare2,3

Booking System

Booking system was confusing at the start resulting in inconsistent information2

Simplify booking system and provide training2,3

Figure 19: Barrier and Recommendation Table. 1 = identified by passengers, 2 = identified by bus driver, 3 = identified by Shire

5.5. WONGAN HILLS to NORTHAM PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE

5.5.1. CONTEXT This pilot service traverses two different sub-regions (the Central Midlands and the Avon), but only picks up passengers in the Central Midlands LGA’s of Victoria Plains and Wongan-Ballidu. 11.80% of each of the two Shire’s populations comprise of people aged 65 and over. This service provides an opportunity for the 169 older residents in the Shire of Wongan-Ballidu and the 106 older residents in the Shire of Victoria Plains to travel to Northam. Figure 20 shows the relatively older median age of the participating communities in comparison to the Western Australia and Australian median ages. ABS data for Wongan Hills shows that the population is ageing, with the proportion of the population aged 65 and over increasing from 10.7% in 2001 to 12.84% in 2011. The communities of Calingiri and Bolgart, in the Shire of Victoria Plains, have experienced the opposite, with the proportion of the population over 65 decreasing from 15.01% in 2001 to 11.83% in 2011. However, the proportion of older residents is likely to increase into the future, given the large proportion of people in the 45–59 age bracket in the 2011 census year. In addition, the proportion of people not changing address in Wongan-Ballidu and Victoria Plains suggests that a large number of residents will choose to age-in-place. If this assumption is correct, this will result in greater pressure on available resources for aged care and associated aged transport options.

Figure 20: Median age of participating pilot communities, compared to the State and National averages (2011).

All LGAs for the Wongan Hills to Northam pilot transport service have a combined average SEIFA score of ~1003 placing them at relative socio-economic advantage compared to the rest of the State and Australia, with the highest combined score out of all participating pilot communities. The Shire of Victoria Plains scored above the baseline figure with 1017, compared to the Shire of Wongan-Ballidu’s score of 990. Participating LGAs have an identical proportion of female residents, slightly less than the State average at 49%. Although only 46% of population in the pilot communities are female, when this data is further broken down to examine the aged gender structure, it becomes clear that there are far more women than men in the over 65 age bracket. In the town of Wongan Hills, women made up approximately 62% of those aged over 65, whereas in Calingiri and Bolgart, women over the age of 65 represent 41% of the older population, lower than the

65

State average of 53% and the Wheatbelt average of 49%161. This has important implications for communities in terms of service provision and infrastructure needs, both now and into the future. The two participating LGA’s have an identical proportion of residents born in Australia to that of the Wheatbelt average at 81%, compared to the State average of 62%. The census data for Wongan Hills reveals that the proportion of the local population who identify themselves as Indigenous has increased substantially, from 5.6% in 2001 to 12.1% in 2011. This trend is counter to those seen in Western Australia and the Shire of Victoria Plains where the data shows little to no change in the proportion of Indigenous people at ~3% across recent census periods. It is also worth noting that the proportion of Indigenous residents in the over 65 age bracket remains largely unchanged in these communities despite the national Indigenous life expectancy being 10 years less than non-indigenous Australians and only representing 0.84% of the over 65 population in Western Australia. The higher proportion of elderly residents, regional status and lower average income (per person, per week) of $591.00 across the two LGA’s compared to $662 in Western Australia as a whole, creates an environment that can limit residents’ access to services.

5.5.2. IMPLEMENTATION For the pilot service the Shire of Wongan-Ballidu supplied the community bus and played the primary planning and organisational role through the Wongan-Ballidu Community Resource Centre. The aim of this pilot service was to provide a service from the Shire of Wongan-Ballidu, through Calingiri and Bolgart into Northam returning on the same day, allowing older residents improved access to key services. Following from meetings between the Shire of Wongan-Ballidu and the WDC, it was agreed that the Shire subsidise the project by $2.50 per kilometre. Passenger fees were used to subsidise the running costs of the project, and were set through community consultation. Ticket price was set at $15 per person for a return trip from Calingiri or Wongan Hills, $10 for a one-way trip from Calingiri or Wongan Hills and $5 for a return trip from Bolgart162. A full cost breakdown is seen in Table 16.

Table 16: Cost breakdown* for the Wongan Hills to Northam pilot transport162

Annual Depreciation (Shire contribution) Annual Insurance $1,316 Annual Registration $269 Annual Service Costs $1,518 Fuel Consumption (based on 20L/200km) $3,485 Driver’s Wage ~ 10 hours at $30/hour $300 Capital Cost $7,803 Average Cost / Km Travelled $1.22 Distances Round Trip Round Trip Cost Wongan Hills – Calingiri – Bolgart – Northam

254 km $310.49

*Disclaimer: These costs are estimated costs before the actual service was run The timetable was set as per Table 17. Passengers were required to book a seat by midday the day prior to the journey, with all carers and friends welcome to join for the journey. This information was presented in a flyer (see Appendix N) and was displayed at Shire offices as well as in community newsletters. Most advertising was distributed in the Shire of Wongan-

161 Australian Bureau of Statistics 2015 162 Shire of Wongan-Ballidu 2015

66

Ballidu via the weekly local newspaper and a large timetable sign in the Community Resource Centre. Table 17: Wongan Hills to Northam Pilot Transport schedule

Runs weekly on Thursdays

Wongan Hills to Northam Northam to Wongan Hills

Wongan Hills 9:15am Northam 3:00pm Calingiri 9:40am Bolgart 3:40pm Bolgart 10:00am Calingiri 4:00pm Northam 10:40am Wongan Hills 4:25pm

5.5.3. FINDINGS The key findings from the Wongan Hills to Northam pilot service were as follows:

The price was considered fair, and it was noted that the driver was an important factor in the success of the project, in terms of passenger comfort and needs. As there is no comparable service existing in the area, it was suggested that future funding for the continuation of the service should come from the local council. Table 18: Service cost for Wongan Hills to Northam Pilot Service






Round trip between Wongan Hills and Northam (est.)

254km $232 $36 $7 $275

Table 18 presents the service costs for the Wongan Hills to Northam pilot service and shows that the cost per trip was $275. A cost-benefit analysis (shown in Table 20) reveals that between four to seven passengers are needed to meet the requirement of cost-benefit break-even points. Assuming the benefit from the trip for each passenger is $55, the number of passengers would need to be greater than five to exceed a benefit-cost ratio of one. For a low estimate of trip benefit with a monetary equivalence of $40, seven passengers are required, and for a high estimate ($70) four passengers are needed. Figure 21 summarises the break-even point of passenger numbers.

Users were mainly female, mostly over the age of 75; The most common reasons for travel were shopping and health services; The majority of passengers were picked up from Wongan Hills; The service peaked towards the final weeks, once awareness had grown; and Word of mouth was the most effective form of promotion, with one individual

taking the initiative to advertise the service and notify relevant community members.

67

Prior to the running of this pilot service, an elderly resident from Wongan Hills would drive residents to medical appointments in Northam; however this arrangement is not sustainable in the long-term. With no comparable transport services existing in the community, and many older residents unable to drive, there is demand for the service and this demand is likely to grow in the future. All of the survey respondents noted that the pilot service allowed them to access more services than before, especially the specialised medical services such as a dentists and physiotherapists. For example, one passenger from Calingiri, who had suffered a stroke, used the service regularly with their partner to undergo physiotherapy treatment in Northam. In order to continue the transport service, the Wongan Hills Community Resource Centre is exploring ways in which to secure funding.

The results in Table 19 indicate the relationship between fare prices and required subsidy for the Wongan Hills to Northam route. The second fare option represents a reasonable trade-off between passengers’ capacity to pay and the benefits gained from the service. This is consistent with comments in the survey that revealed that aged passengers benefit more from the service. However, given the service was the least used at lower prices, any higher priced fare structure should be tested. This may be done by discussing with the passengers to see if they were willing to pay the fare increase in order to keep the service going.

Figure 21: Marginal Rate of substitution between Number of Daily Trips and Daily Household Income in Round trip between Wongan Hills and Northam

“[The pilot transport service] had a huge impact on the users of the service. There is no way for older residents who cannot drive to get out of the town. The older residents in town are very loyal to local businesses and services, however, there are some things that they cannot access. Therefore the service to Northam gave them the opportunity to do so.” – Wongan Hills Pilot Transport Bus Driver

Table 19: Fares for current passenger number in Round trip between Wongan Hills and Northam

Under the assumption that Fare option 2 is chosen, the subsidy represents 75% of the total cost. The required subsidy levels and the benefit to cost ratio are shown in Table 20 when passenger numbers grow an additional 50% and 100%. The service becomes economically beneficial and sustainable as passengers numbers increase. Table 20: Sensitivity analysis of passenger number in Round trip between Wongan Hills and Northam


Passenger Number=4

Passenger Number=6

Passenger Number=8

Fare Benefit

WDC Subsidy

Fare Benefit

WDC Subsidy

Fare Benefit

WDC Subsidy

Wongan Hills to

Northam

Wongan Hills $20 $275 $70 $205 $105 $170 $140 $135 Northam $15

Benefit to cost ratio 0.8 1.2 1.6 Continued demand for the pilot transport service is evident in the passenger and bus driver responses. One passenger stated “there is nothing in existence that provides this service”. This pilot service provides an opportunity for older members of the community, most of whom prefer not to drive, to access services and attend social activities that they would otherwise not be able to. Whilst the service could be opened up to the wider community it was felt that preferential treatment should be given to older community members.

The following are some of the positive features of the service identified by various passengers:

The flexibility and personality of the bus driver, made all passengers feel comfortable;

It was a stress-free booking process and journey; The door-to-door pick up and drop off option was good; and The occasional route changes to enjoy the scenery were appreciated.

Fare Service cost Average Passenger Number =4 Fare Benefits WDC Subsidy

Fare option 1

Wongan Hills $10 $275 $35 $240 Calingiri $7.5

Fare option 2

Wongan Hills $20 $70 $205 Calingiri $15

Fare option 3

Wongan Hills $30 $105 $170 Calingiri $22.5

Fare option 4

Wongan Hills $40 $140 $135 Calingiri $30

“There are visiting services to Wongan, however they are often booked out months in advance so being able to access them in Northam was a great benefit.” – Wongan Hills Transport Pilot Bus Driver

69

Theme

Barriers

Recommen-dations


Advertising campaign could be improved1

Little knowledge of services available in the regional centre1

Improve marketing and awareness of the service1

Motivate Northam Senior Citizens Club to explain services to passengers1

Frequency

Low uptake on weekly basis4

Run the service fortnightly at most to make more viable1,2,3

Operation

Bus was not suitable to all users1,2

New bus is necessary to cater to passengers with wheelchairs2,3

Organisational Support

Change in staff led to inconsistencies in information2,3

Inconsistent access to resources2,3

Dedicated funding and resources2,3

Increase communication between bus driver and Shires2,3

Booking System

Confusion and unfamiliarity with the booking system2,3

Training of Shire staff to use the booking system2,3

Figure 22: Barrier and Recommendation Table. 1 = identified by passengers, 2 = identified by bus driver, 3 = identified by Shire, 4 = assumed from pilot data

5.6. MOBILITY PROFILES

This section presents the survey findings and analyses the results to determine the different capabilities of elderly residents in participating pilot communities and how their mobility impacts on their quality of life. The section combines all the service data in order to understand the overall relationship between perceptions of mobility and self-assessed quality of life. Each survey response was grouped accordingly:

All of the survey responses are then combined to assess the overall rating of the pilot transport service and a summary of the economic findings. Analysing the differences in mobility is necessary in order to understand and plan for demand. For example, if there are a higher proportion of older residents in Group Three (moderate to high mobility difficulty) the area may require more specialised transport services.

5.6.1. PERCEPTIONS OF MOBILITY AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION All respondents indicated that they could get around town by walking or by driving. Two required walking sticks (occasionally), whilst five respondents indicated that they only drove their car to the town. However, fourteen of eighteen respondents (one missing) indicated that they had access to a car that they could drive themselves. Table 21 presents the respondents’ perceptions of their own mobility. Most respondents indicated no or slight difficulty in accessing basic services. However, three respondents from the Narrogin pilot transport service and four from the Joondalup pilot transport service indicated a degree of difficulty in accessing services. They also expressed some need for travel assistance. The participants were grouped into mobility groups according to their level of mobility. Table 21: Perceptions of their own mobility

Dimension of mobility Disagree (strongly) Neutral Agree

(strongly) Easy to access Medical 4 6 7 Easy to access Retail 6 5 6 Easy to access Social Activities 5 2 8 I can travel when I need to 2 4 11 I do not need assistance 7 0 9 I am not reliant on others for transport 7 3 7 I am able to find others to help 7 6 4 I can board a bus without assistance 0 2 15

The respondents were grouped by their responses to the mobility questions summarised in Table 21. The categories chosen were those: without mobility restrictions; with slight to moderate mobility difficulty; and moderate to high mobility difficulty. The members of the unrestricted group reported no difficulty in independently accessing medical, retail services and social activities. However, respondents who expressed some challenges to access services or social activities and required some assistance were placed in the slight to moderate mobility difficulty. The remaining respondents stated that they could only travel with some assistance and were classified as having moderate to high mobility difficulties.

Group One – without mobility difficulty; Group Two – with slight to moderate mobility difficulty; and Group Three – with moderate to high mobility difficulty.

71

5.6.2. PROFILE FOR GROUP ONE – WITHOUT MOBILITY DIFFICULTY In the group that identified with no mobility difficulty, respondents reported having no difficulty in accessing medical services or shopping facilities, as seen in Figure 23. Additionally, they had no need for assistance and did not rely on others for transport. Importantly, their mobility did not prevent them from participating in social activities or accessing services in their local community. However, for longer journeys to regional centres they indicated some form of reliance on others. For example, Passenger Three (Kondinin), who travelled to Narrogin four times out of seven available services, had no access to a car to make this trip on his own. One exception was Passenger Seven, who resided in Woodridge and travelled to Joondalup. She reported that her difficulty in accessing social activities, medical services and shopping, was because she was her husband’s carer rather than because she experienced mobility constraints. Appendix O contains more detailed information on the respondents’ profiles.

Figure 23: Perceptions of mobility for respondents without mobility difficulty

For activities within their hometown, this group of respondents expressed having no trouble participating in social activities (Figure 24a) and not requiring assistance from friends or relatives (Figure 24b).

a. I have no trouble accessing activities b. I do not need to rely on others for transport

Figure 24: Quality of life for respondents without mobility difficulty

72

5.6.3. PROFILE FOR GROUP TWO – WITH SLIGHT TO MODERATE MOBILITY DIFFICULTY

Respondents in this group have slight difficulty in accessing medical services and social activities, as illustrated in Figure 25. However, most of them reported that mobility does not affect their quality of life. On balance they are ‘neutral’, or express no difficulty in their mobility, but at the same time they are not prepared to state that mobility is easy for them. Perhaps the most concerning issue for this group, is that they express a challenge in finding someone if they need assistance as shown in graph on the right hand side of Figure 26. Appendix P contains more detailed information on the respondents’ profiles.

Figure 25: Perceptions of mobility for respondents with mobility difficulty

Figure 26: Quality of life for respondents with mobility difficulty

5.6.4. PROFILES FOR GROUP THREE – WITH MODERATE TO HIGH MOBILITY DIFFICULTY

Most respondents in this group reported that their poor mobility as being partly due to needing mobility aids (walking stick) or to their lack of access to a car, as shown in Figure 27. They mainly rely on other people to drive them or on other transport modes to visit regional centres (right hand graph in Figure 28). They stated that they would like to travel more frequently to attend appointments as shown in the left hand graph of Figure 28. They expressed that their limited mobility influences their participation in social activities, which further leads to social exclusion. Of the nineteen respondents in all of the pilot services, seven were in this group. Appendix Q contains more detailed information on the respondents’ profiles.

Figure 28: Perceptions of mobility for respondents with mobility difficulty

Figure 27: Quality of life for respondents with mobility difficulty

5.7. RATING OF THE PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICES

Figure 29 displays respondents’ satisfaction with the pilot transport services. As seen in Figure 29, most respondents (three with missing data) were highly satisfied with all aspects of the service. There were, however, some concerns about the booking service. A number of participants stated that the service was not well advertised and they were surprised that more people were not making use of the service. More detailed information for late respondents’ profiles is available in Appendix R.

The passengers also wrote comments regarding service convenience and suggestions for the improvement of the service:

All respondents (twelve of the nineteen, with seven missing responses) mentioned that this service enabled them to participate in social activities;

Twelve respondents stated that the service helped them to access health services;

All respondents (fourteen of nineteen, with four missing and one blank answer) were happy with their visit to the regional centre;

Nine respondents suggested that more advertising or public awareness was needed

Three respondents thought the level of communication was adequate; Nine out of eleven respondents were satisfied with the service as it was; and Four passengers from the Joondalup route suggested the service frequency be

increased from once per week to twice weekly.

Figure 29: Bus service rating satisfaction

5.8. SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC FINDINGS

This section summarises the economic cost benefit analysis presented for each service and presents economic recommendations. A brief summary of the analysis is as follows:

Table 22 summarises the level of subsidy and the benefit cost ratio at the current levels of demand for each of the three routes. Considering the higher estimate of MRS=$70, two of the three routes meet the breakeven ratio of 1.0, but not by much. The results indicate that continued financial support of the service may maintain patronage levels and may result in growing demand over time. For each service it is recommended that the operators consider a higher fare. The advantage of doing so is to limit the amount of subsidy required, thus making it more attractive for the local agency to continue its support of the services. The right hand columns of Table 22 report the level of subsidy and the revenues at the recommended fares. However, it should be noted that the reason for recommending high fares is to increase the chance that the service will continue to be supported. If it is found that the fare structure restricts patronage numbers, the level of pricing should be re-examined. The cost of running the service as given here does not include in-kind-time of current employees in the local councils. Along with the need to maintain or grow patronage, the most important recommendation is that local agencies should find ways to streamline ticketing and advertising. These recommendations are made elsewhere in the report. From a purely financial perspective, the operational cost of the service and the subsidy requirements are small and could easily be supported by local councils. From an economic perspective the service provides social (and potentially health) benefits that well exceed the patron’s capacity to pay. Removing the service may result in a considerable loss in welfare for which any compensation by way of an alternative program may not be able to be provided for the same low level of funding.

Cost data provided from the operator on the Hyden to Narrogin bus route was used to estimate a trip cost per kilometre, which was then applied to the other two routes.

The Marginal Rate of Substitution (MRS) between income and the benefits incurred from using the bus service was calculated. The estimate of an average MRS of $40 per trip was sourced from a study of trip behaviour for households in Greater Melbourne. This estimate corresponds to an urban setting where there are more opportunities than are in the Wheatbelt. A conservative value for the MRS of $55 per trip is assumed.

An intercept survey provided some data on the level of mobility of the current passengers as well as questions of perceived levels of exclusion and wellbeing. The data revealed that passengers expressed no difficulty with mobility or accessing social engagements. However this was not true for all respondents and three groups were identified based on their level of mobility. It was proposed that the group reporting the highest level mobility challenges would have a higher MRS than the other groups and that expressing no mobility challenges would most likely place a lower value on the trip.

As there were an equal number of respondents in each group, the analysis proceeded with an assumed average MRS of $55. However, sensitivity analysis was conducted to show the sensitivity of the breakeven passenger numbers (where the total benefits equal the cost of the trip) to the assumption of the average MRS.

For each service the level of subsidy required was calculated under different fare regimes and under different demand scenarios.

76

Table 22: Government subsidy for each bus service route

Route Average Passenger

Number

Passengers’ Social Welfare

BCR*

Government Subsidy

Fare Revenue

Hyden to Narrogin

5 Low-$40 $200 0.6 $245 $75 Base-$55 $275 0.9 High-$70 $350 1.1

Jurien Bay to Joondalup

8 Low-$40 $320 0.4 $630 $250 Base-$55 $440 0.5 High-$70 $560 0.64

Wongan Hills to Northam

4 Low-$40 $160 0.6 $205 $70 Base-$55 $220 0.8 High-$70 $280 1.0

*BCR means benefit to cost ratio Based on the current average passenger numbers, Local Government needs to subsidize per return trip $245 to operate the service between Kondinin and Narrogin, $630 to support the service between Jurien Bay and Joondalup, and $205 for the Wongan Hills to Northam service. Although the government expenditure occupies the majority (60%-75%) of the total pilot service costs, the subsidies are less than the passengers’ social benefits. This suggests high return values from the expenditure.

6.0 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS The three pilot transport services demonstrated the potential for future services to positively impact many older people living in regional areas. Common themes have emerged from the pilot service evaluations relating to service operation and support. A key to success has been the ability to build flexibility into the services in order to understand demand and adapt as it changes over time. A second critical success factor was the role the bus driver played, and how the caring personality and friendly nature of the bus driver influenced the success of the services. If appropriate changes are made to maximize patronage of each transport service, it is possible that all services could continue to run and positively impact regional communities. Given the services success in improving the mobility of Wheatbelt residents, it is recommended they should continue. Improved mobility bolsters the CAFC in Small Towns Project, strengthens the links to other aspects of aged living and ageing-in-place and has a broader positive impact on the community. Improved mobility is an important element in the broader aged-friendly initiative because it allows for a much broader range of benefits than would otherwise be possible from an aged-friendly programme. The pilot transport services bolster mobility for aged Wheatbelt residents and are crucial to the success of the broader aged-friendly programme in the Region. By definition, community transport will never be independently commercially viable as it caters to people who are unable to access or afford mainstream commercial transport 163. Yet, a successful regional transport system needs to have access to funding and other resources that enable commercial or non-commercial operators to provide essential mobility solutions. The long-term viability of the services will depend on the availability of funding sources and should be based on the findings of ongoing monitoring. Given this, the following recommendations to government will focus on funding options to continue the service in the short and medium-term. 163 Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation 2011

77

6.1. KEY SUBSIDY RECOMMENDATIONS TO GOVERNMENT

Analysis of pilot services funded through WDC’s Aged Friendly Communities project and the Avon Link Feeder trials have resulted in recommendations for cost effective subsidies that will encourage the ongoing operation of alternative public transport systems in the Wheatbelt. Three scenarios are proposed – status quo, $1.56 per km State Government subsidy and Local Government subsidy without State Government contributions. The latter two outline key subsidy recommendations to Government: Status Quo Status quo assumes the continuation of aged transport services as they currently are, including Transwa bus services, HACC, PATS and the Country Age Pension Fuel Card. As stated previously, the Transwa bus services provided to Wheatbelt residents are predominantly a part of services directed to areas outside of the Region, such as Esperance, Albany and Geraldton. They do not allow for day trips to regional centres or outer metro health and lifestyle services. While the Avon and Merredin Link train services provide some transport to Perth and the outer metro from the Avon and Central East sub-regions, their services alone do not directly provide residents from smaller towns access to return day-trips. Additional bus services are needed which take into account the specific transport needs of Wheatbelt residents in these smaller towns. At the current level of public transport services, aged residents in the Wheatbelt who are unable to drive are becoming increasingly reliant on volunteers, friends or family members to participate in basic everyday activities and health management, such as grocery shopping and attending specialist appointments. Government support through assistance schemes such as PATS or HACC community transport will become more important in reducing these access barriers to regional or urban centres for their specialist services. However, funding for these schemes is quite limited and their administration can be so complex that many of those who desperately need transport assistance do not seek it. As the population ages and people continue to retire in rural areas, there is considerable concern that a more comprehensive, but cost effective suite of transport services and schemes will be required, including a strategic approach to providing more accessible, convenient and affordable transport for rural residents. $1.56 per km State Government subsidy The pilot projects were analysed with a view to recommending a State Government subsidy that initiated local investment in alternative public transport solutions. It is recommended that any subsidy considered as a rate per km would be sufficient to encourage Local Governments to run small bus public transport. Initially it is proposed to allocate a funding amount for 2 years that would allow six services to run on a weekly or fortnightly basis. Under this scenario it is recommended that the service be made available to non-concession holders as well in order to make the program more viable. This scenario was tested using a realistic number of passengers based on average passenger numbers and utilising information from fully Local Government-run pilots. Information was also sought from the Jurien Bay to Joondalup pilot as it was the only pilot to involve a private bus provider partnership. Preliminary calculations found that a State Government subsidy of $1.56 per km would be adequate to allow the cost of the services to be met (after the fares and Local Government contributions are taken into account; total cost

78

of a service is in the vicinity of $2.34 per km). By providing a subsidy of $1.56 per km, the following government funding would be needed:

It is recommendation that two years of funding be made available; That is, approximately $350,000 for two years. Should fewer services be run, this funding would provide for a longer trial. The calculations supporting these recommendations can be found in Appendix S. The following assumptions were made in the preliminary calculations:

Under these assumptions, to achieve the types of fares charged in the pilots (for both concession and standard passengers), Local Government would have to make a contribution in the vicinity of $0.39 per km, in addition to the $1.56 per km State Government subsidy. If Local Governments wanted to reduce the fares even further, or the service receives less patronage than the average used to make these calculations, this per km would increase accordingly. In addition to their contribution per km, Local Government would incorporate booking, complaints handling and marketing services into their existing staff capacity. The provision of a Local Government subsidy would enable the service to continue and help the program to expand and benefit other Wheatbelt’s communities. It represents a cost-effective approach to achieve public transport service delivery in Local Government areas that deem it a priority. Local Government subsidy without State Government contributions Another option investigated is for Local Government to provide the necessary subsidies for the six bus services, without a contribution from State Government. This includes costs associated with maintenance repairs, operation costs, bus hire and bus depreciation costs, administration costs and contributions to achieve the types of fares charged in the pilots. Under this scenario, the costs to Local Government to continue running the six services (three pilot services and three Avon Link funded feeder services) are as follows:

To run the six services fortnightly for a year, government subsidy would have to equal $109,138 (including $50,000 administration fees provided externally and separate to the service providers, to ensure successful reporting)

To run the six services weekly for a year, government subsidy would have to equal $168,273 (including $50,000 administration fees provided externally and separate to the service providers, to ensure successful reporting)

State Government should not subsidise a service to a level where fares are lower than those charged by Transwa and where all operating costs are covered;

Participating Local Governments would be entitled to provide a commitment that would lower the passenger standard and concession fares below that which Transwa charges; and

Any subsidies that allow a service to run cost effectively and charge less than Transwa fares should be made by the communities involved.

79

The calculations supporting these recommendations can be found in Appendix S. In summary, this would work out at Local Government subsidising in the vicinity of $1.95 per km, with no contribution from the State. In this scenario, if Local Governments wanted to reduce the fares even further, or the service receives less patronage than the average used to make these calculations, this per km would increase accordingly. It is important to note that these costs are shared across the Local Governments who participate. These calculations are to be used as a guide for the development of regional bus services, not necessarily confined to the same services provided during the pilot program. The provision of regional bus services should include an opt-in process whereby Local Governments and their community members can willingly decide to take up this opportunity or forgo it. While this scenario has been used to demonstrate full costs of the service without State Government contributions, discussions with the Wheatbelt Local Governments have indicated this to be a disadvantageous option for them without some form of State Government assistance.

6.2. INDIVIDUAL PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS

Individual pilot service recommendations were prepared with the intent to improve mobility and transport options for older residents and to support them as they age-in-place in the Wheatbelt. Academic literature and the pilot transport survey results were drawn on when making recommendations. In the context of this local transport plan, recommendations with a short-term timeframe can be understood as running over one year or less, medium-term is defined as between one and five years, and long-term includes recommendations into the future of five years or longer. In order for the recommendations to be useful, they must be clear, realistic and achievable. For this purpose, each recommendation is presented in three broader themes as well as more specifically for the participating pilot communities. The three common themes for the pilot transport service include:

The individual pilot transport services highlight how different models have differing uptake and ridership across the Wheatbelt due to diverse needs. Table 23 summarises the specific recommendations for each pilot transport service in further detail.

To run the six services weekly for a year, halving both concession and standard fare prices to achieve fares charged in the pilots, Local Government subsidy would have to equal $147,841.20

To run the six services weekly for a year, halving concession fare prices only, Local Government subsidy would have to equal $133,437.20

To run the six services fortnightly for a year, halving both concession and standard fare prices to achieve fares charged in the pilots, Local Government subsidy would have to equal $73,920.60

To run the six services fortnightly for a year, halving concession fare prices only, Local Government subsidy would have to equal $66,718.60

running of the service – flexibility and responsiveness to dynamic demand; support of the service – community oriented, bottom-up approach; and financial future of the service – sustainable funding source

80

Table 23: Summary table of recommendations for each pilot transport service undertaken in the Wheatbelt

Recommendations Open

Hyden to Narrogin Pilot Transport Jurien Bay to Joondalup Pilot Transport Wongan Hills to Northam Pilot Transport

Advertising More promotion needed about services and amenities Narrogin e.g. heated pool

Expand on advertising avenues e.g. radio, mailbox drop or feature in local newspaper calendar

Make the current advertising design clearer

More promotion via a mailbox drop and a Facebook page

Repeat service advertising in the Moore River News

Improve marketing and awareness with more pamphlets in Shire and Community Resource Centre offices

Expand on advertising avenues e.g. radio, local newsletters, larger print timetables

Booking System Continue with existing booking system Could simplify booking system More training required for Shire staff Cost Continue with current cost structure If service was open to all ages, persons

under the age of 50 could pay an additional $10

Continue with current cost structure

Eligibility Expand eligibility to whole community to make service more viable

Open up the service to other age groups to fill the seats

Could be expanded to the rest of the community if needed

Frequency Avoid running service in quiet periods e.g. School Holidays

Run once a month instead of fortnightly

Some desire to run the service twice a week instead of once

Needs to run year-round for passengers to access ongoing medical appointments

Continue running fortnightly or alter to every three weeks

Flexibility Friendly and flexible driver critical to success Friendly and flexible driver critical to success

Friendly and flexible driver critical to success

Operation Continue with existing bus and operation Require bus with wheelchair access Require bus with wheelchair access Organisational Support

Link with interest groups and tie in with local events in Narrogin

Better coordination at destination for more frail passengers to get around in Narrogin

Collaborate with HACC providers to communicate the difference between services

Explore most effective way of sharing management and operational roles in the service

Motivate the Northam Age Care Centre to explain all the services they offer to passengers

Route Occasionally change the destination e.g. Williams

Low uptake from Hyden, need to re-evaluate starting destination

Occasionally change the destination e.g. Geraldton

Include a rest stop with access to a bathroom and food half way

Continue route flexibility depending on where people have booked from

Subsidy Should be funded by State in partnership with Local Governments

Local Government cover cost of empty seats on pilot

Dedicated funding and resourcing is necessary to keep the service running

Technology Possibility of sending text message

alert/reminder the day before the service Technology not thought to benefit users Technology not though to benefit users

HYDEN TO NARROGIN TRANSPORT RECOMMENDATIONS The Hyden to Narrogin pilot service requires a re-evaluation of the service frequency and improved communication between age care providers, such as HACC services. If this service were to continue running it is recommended that participating Local Governments improve the service promotion and do targeted mailbox drops. Targeted advertising needs to be accompanied by initiatives to make the destination more attractive via information flyers on specialist services available in Narrogin (e.g. a heated swimming pool). In the medium-term it is recommended that the Local Government work with the community to ascertain demand and re-evaluate the starting destination of Hyden. Service frequency likewise needs to be considered. In the pilot service it became evident that Hyden pick-ups were inconvenient for other passengers travelling from Kondinin. If the service was run monthly there is the possibility of higher uptake from destinations such as Hyden, making this starting destination more viable. Similarly, the destination could be changed on occasion to locations such as Williams on their monthly market day. Overall, this service should continue but requires improved coordination with all participating Local Governments and age care providers. Cooperation with existing HACC providers will help to remove perceived competition between the two services.

JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP TRANSPORT RECOMMENDATIONS The Jurien Bay to Joondalup pilot service needs higher patronage numbers or an alternative funding source in order to continue in the medium and long-term. It is recommended that the service run fortnightly and expand eligibility to the whole community in order to fill empty seats and make the service financially viable. In order to accommodate persons of all ages and abilities the bus should be expanded to include extra steps onto the bus, and explore avenues for wheelchair access. Targeted advertising towards residents in surrounding towns, as well as in the pick-up locations, will include smaller population groups that have comparatively fewer services within driving distance. It is recommended that the booking system be simplified and take into account the different skill sets across Local Governments or, alternatively, have one Local Government solely responsible for the running of the service.

WONGAN HILLS TO NORTHAM TRANSPORT RECOMMENDATIONS The Wongan Hills to Northam pilot service requires improvements in marketing and awareness of the service to increase patronage. Increasing communication between the bus driver and the Local Governments would allow the service to adapt according to demand. For example, on some occasions with lower patronage it may be more economical to take a car instead of the community bus. Running the service monthly instead of weekly will encourage higher passenger numbers and make the service more sustainable. In conjunction with targeted advertising it is recommended that participating Local Governments encourage public sectors and local businesses at the destination to explain what services are available to older residents - for example, the Senior Citizens Clubs in Regional Centres. Northam Age Care Centre. To achieve medium-term viability, participating Local Governments need to prioritise the transport service, provide dedicated resourcing and secure funding. Alternative funding sources need to be investigated to support the running of this service.

6.3. COMMON THEMES AROUND SERVICE OPERATION

EXPAND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA The transport service must be understood as a ‘whole of community’ resource to give the transport service a heightened element of transparency and flexibility. To address the issue of low patronage and variable demand in regional communities, it is recommended that there be broader eligibility criteria. In order to make the service financially viable, it is worthwhile monitoring short-term passenger numbers with the service open to, and advertised towards, all age groups. A holistic approach that encompasses all aspects of transport and age friendly planning will improve the responsiveness of future transport options. By emphasizing an all-age-friendly service (opposed to only an aged-friendly service), community transportation will create opportunities for intergenerational connections and create associated benefits such as improved perceptions of safety and belonging164. Survey respondents across each of the pilot communities have indicated that there would be more users if it were available to the wider public. This recommendation favours a more inclusive and all-age-friendly approach whilst still having the capacity to target and accommodate older residents.

BOTTOM-UP APPROACH A bottom-up approach to regional development and planning is based on the expectations and initiatives of local regional communities. This approach will encourage local participation in all aspects of planning via community consultation, information sharing or participatory evaluations such as self-assessments. A bottom-up approach addresses the conflicting issue of low passenger volume with high individual passenger demand; in other words, the importance of the service for certain individuals, yet lower patronage in terms of what is financially viable. By continually working with the community, the service will adapt and be responsive to changes in demand. One recommendation for a bottom-up approach is the integration of a ‘community champion’ into the running of the service. A community champion can be understood as an intermediary between the community and Local Government in the form of a person or group. The community champion can take voluntarily interest in the implementation and success of the project and encourage project ownership in the community. This role will help tap into local volunteers whilst being responsive to changing need, frequency and route selection and enable long-term flexibility. The benefits of a bottom-up approach include greater respect of people and ideas whilst recognizing a diverse range of community needs.

FURTHER EXPLORE THE DEMAND PROFILE The success of each pilot service requires a detailed understanding of individual mobility demands and elements that influence that demand. It is recommended that there be further examination of demand on an individual scale to tap into the community and determine how best to meet individual needs. Harnessing latent demand will make transportation services more viable and sustainable in the medium and long-term. One option for understanding demand gaps involves communication with local businesses and community groups to advertise and reach-out to residents who may not otherwise be aware of existing services. Providing support for users in multiple forms must start with initial contact and be built on in the medium and long-term.

164 Bosak 2016

6.4. COMMON THEMES AROUND SERVICE SUPPORT

COLLABORATIVE SUPPORT Local Government operation, engagement and capability are a critical factor for success. It is recommended that the Local Governments underwrite the cost of empty seats on the service to encourage Local Government involvement and marketing. The WDC’s expertise in age-friendly initiatives provided external support to participating communities. In the future, it is recommended that the WDC be funded to attend team building and skill recognition sessions with participating Local Governments on local transport and age friendly projects. Early meeting sessions between the WDC and Local Governments, prior to the running of the pilot transport service, would cater the running of the service towards individual community strengths. An external group such as the WDC should provide support for stakeholder communication and collaboration. This form of collaborative support allows for an integrated transport service in the line of the Southern Mallee Transport Connections Partnership, enhancing the coordination of existing service and developing new transport solutions across multiple Local Governments. An outside body is strong enough to drive consistent transport planning and collaboration, yet flexible enough to recognise and support the unique differences of each Wheatbelt Local Government. OPENNESS TO TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES Low-order technological awareness exists across a number of smaller regional communities, particularly amongst older residents. Lower uptake of technology advances, such as phone apps, has created a reluctance to integrate technology in age friendly transport services in the Region. However, technology can offer integration of social activities with mobility in regional areas. New applications of transportation in combination with information sharing can be integrated into future planning to ensure real-time sharing, smart parking, park and ride transit, and encourage new opportunities to rideshare for a wider range of trips. There is a lot of potential for greater outreach and greater integration of technology in age friendly transport and mobility services. Therefore, it is recommended that each community explore how to educate residents in the use of technology such as apps, and be open to technological advances and initiatives in transport services. As technology innovations and trends are difficult to predict, and the pace of change is rapid, regional transport planning must be open to changes and be flexible to technological advances.

MONITORING, EVALUATION AND TRANSPARENCY Across the examined transport literature, and in the findings of the pilot services, it became evident that ongoing monitoring and evaluation is critical to long-term success. Continued monitoring and evaluation will ensure that the services are responsive to changes regarding the route and frequency. It is recommended that user surveys be conducted a minimum of twice a year to understand inevitable changes in demand. An age friendly community survey previously completed in the Shire of Dandaragan had the following suggestion, “if people bother to complete this questionnaire they will very likely want to know what it achieves.” The statement continues, explaining that this engagement “gives them the ownership and a sense of purpose and they will be more likely to contribute time and effort again.” 165 Therefore, monitoring and evaluation are not enough, as the information is within the public interest. Any publically available documentation that involves age-friendly mobility options should be promoted in a range of user-friendly formats in order to be effective. The creation of a publically available community document with future transport and community findings will offer residents an opportunity to see how their contribution shaped the research. 165 Shire of Dandaragan (2016), Age Friendly Community Plan

SUSTAINABLE FUNDING SOURCE The economic and demographic diversity of the Wheatbelt corresponds to differences in local resources and capabilities. In order to account for these differences, it is recommended that any future transport plans explore all opportunities to ease the cost burden on remote and regional transport operators. It is critical to consider funding and financing options for whole—of-life costs of the project, especially as older residents can become reliant on that form of transport to access specialist services in the future. In regional areas there is a common challenge for communities to develop long-term solutions that are also sustainable, particularly when transport services stand to produce little economic return for commercial operators, if operating without subsidies. In order to secure equitable and sustainable funding it is necessary that data collection continues, so that robust funding arguments can be substantiated with evidence of positive outcomes. Investigating, incentivizing and facilitating opportunities for private sector investment and developer contributions in the short-term will encourage sustainable economic planning in the long-term. From a purely economic perspective, the operational cost of the service and the subsidy requirements are small compared to the social benefits and could be supported by local councils. Removing the service may result in a considerable loss in welfare for which any compensation by way of an alternative programme may not be able to be provided for the same low level of funding. This transport service suggests high return values from expenditure.

7.0 CONCLUSION

This local transport plan aimed to identify and improve transport options and access to key services for older residents in the Wheatbelt. Each of the three Wheatbelt pilot transport services successfully improved transport options for older residents to access key services such as medical and specialised shopping over the 22-week trial period. The critical barrier for the service to continue running was found to be the cost of the service, when compared to the passenger volumes. The key to success was identified as flexibility in the service that adapted to demand variability as well as the friendly and caring nature of the bus drivers. Further critical success factors were as follows:

“The lack of public transport in the area will become a greater issue as the population of larger towns such as Northam continues to grow and smaller communities decline in population. For people residing in these small communities travel will be required to access many services as they increasingly become restricted to the regional centres where the population is concentrated.” – Mia Davies, Deputy Nationals Leader (Kagi 2016)

85

The combination of fair pricing together with social and medical opportunities has seen services become popular with the aged members of the respective communities, with families making use of the Jurien Bay- Joondalup service. With the right driver selection, as noted by Wongan Ballidu/Victoria Plains and Kondinin, together with a scheduled run-time suited to the service and target market, each service could be viable. That being said, some services experienced more issues than others with the Shire of Victoria Plains experiencing issues due to the unfamiliar nature of the booking system. Likewise with the Jurien Bay- Joondalup service, although this was improved and was working well after some time. Improvements to the services include alternative transport at the destination (Kondinin), a new bus (Wongan Ballidu/Victoria Plains Pilot) and a structure age versus price system (Jurien Bay- Joondalup), amongst others.

Overall, this local transport plan determined that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to regional transport planning. Seeing that is was a pilot service, it has been very successful. When the services are formalised, the likelihood is that there will be more frequent users as people become familiar with the service. All services should continue into the future but should be adapted according to the capacity of each community. This transport model meets individual community needs and should be prioritized by Local Governments in order to have a higher chance of success. To be age-friendly, regional communities need to offer choice and opportunities for residents to access goods and services. In the Wheatbelt, a lack of public transport is one of the most significant issues facing an ageing population. The pilot transport services effectively and efficiently addressed local transport challenges facing elderly Wheatbelt residents including a dispersed population over a large geographical area, effectually creating opportunities to provide benefits such as reduced isolation and improved access to medical appointments. The services bolster all phases of the CAFC in Small Towns project, with transportation and mobility being critical to support ageing-in-place. Improved mobility for older regional residents is an important element of the broader aged-friendly initiative because it reduces the physical gap in access to aged care services. Overall, the benefits of the pilot transport services far outweigh the relatively small cost of the service. Therefore it is recommended that all of the services continue running due to the positive social outcomes.

Affordable fares; Recognition that ‘no one size fits all’ for transport service delivery; Monitoring of emerging trends and flexibility to respond to changing preferences

(routes, schedules, destinations etc.); Coordinated and consisted financial commitment and investment from

participating Local Governments; Respected community champion facilitates implementation and reviews

outcomes; External investment as opposed to building a transport system solely on user-

pays revenue; Quality of service, in particular, the helpful nature of the bus driver; and Good communication, public awareness and engagement.

The service offers an important chance for travellers to engage socially; The number of passengers required to economically justify the subsidy is at least

five; and Considering the social and health benefits to passengers that are delivered by the

service, all of the services should continue to run.

86

“We appreciate the bus service that has been trialed over the last 22 weeks. It has greatly affected us in a positive way by enhancing our social network and increasing our ability to reach medical appointments. We would be ever so grateful if it could become a regular service.” – Passenger led Petition for Jurien Bay to Joondalup service

8.0 REFERENCES Allan, E; Chandra, D; Ervick-Knote, H; Kostyniuk, A; & Yau, D. (2014). Age-Friendly Portage la Prairie. University of Manitoba, Canada. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2014). Catalogue 3235.0, Population by Age and Sex, Regions of Australia, 2014. Australian Government. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2015). Catalogue 3235.0, Population by Age and Sex, Regions of Australia, 2014 – Western Australia Summary. Australian Government. Australia. Cancer Council. (2011). No Transport No Treatment. Retrieved from: http://www.cancercouncil.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/No-Transport_No-Treatment.pdf Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2016). Socioeconomic Status. Australian Government. Retrieved from http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=6442459258 Australian Local Government Association. (2006). Age-friendly built environments: opportunities for Local Government. Australian Government. Battellino, H., & McClain, K. (2011). Community Transport in NSW–Broadening the Horizon. In Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF), 34th, 2011, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, 34 (0080). Bell, D, Currie, G & Director, M-mTS 2007, 'Travel and lifestyle impacts of new bus services in outer suburban Melbourne', in 30th Australasian Transport Research Forum. Melbourne. Bernoth, M, A; Dietsch, E; & Davies, C. (2012). Forced into exile: the traumatising impact of rural care service inaccessibility. Rural Remote Health, 12, 19-24. Bosak, S. (2016). Benefits of Intergenerational Connections. The Legacy Project. Retrieved from http://www.legacyproject.org/guides/intergenbenefits.html Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation. (2011). Rural and Regional Community Transport Review. Byles & Gallienne, (2012). Driving in older age: a longitudinal study of women in urban, regional, and remote areas and the impact of caregiving. Journal of Women and Ageing, 24(2), 113-125. Byles, J., Gibson, R., Parkinson, L., & Dobson, A. (2007). Driving myself: main forms of transport among older women in rural and remote Australia Paper presented at the 9th National Rural Health Conference, Albur. Carson, D.B, & Koch, A. (2013). Divining the local: Mobility, scale and fragmented development. Local Economy, 28(3), 304-319. Cartwright, C. (2007). Affordable Rental Housing for Older People in Australia. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1114(1), 258-266.

88

Council on the Ageing Western Australia. (2013). Age Friendly Communities Collective Examination of Western Australian Local Government Research Reports. Government of Western Australia. Country Health South Australia. (2014). Patient Assistance Transport Scheme Introduction. Government of South Australia. ConcessionsWA. (2016). Regional Public Transport. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.concessions.wa.gov.au. Cultural and Indigenous Research Centre Australia. (2009). Comparative Social Isolation Amongst Older People in the ACT. Department of Disability, Housing and Community Services. Retrieved from http://www.communityservices.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/50528/ACT_Isolation_-_Final_Report.pdf Currie, G & Delbose, A. (2009). Exploring public transport usage trends in an ageing population/ Transportation, 37, 151-164. Currie, G., Richardson, T., Smyth, P., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hine, J., Lucas, K., . . . Stanley, J. (2009). Investigating links between transport disadvantage, social exclusion and well-being in Melbourne—Preliminary results. Transport Policy, 16(3), 97-105. Davis, S & Bartlett, H. (2008). Healthy aging in rural Australia: issues and challenges. Australian Journal of Ageing. Davison, L; Enoch, M; Ryley, T; Quddus, M & Wang, C. (2012). Identifying potential market niches for Demand Responsive Transport. Transportation Business and Management, 3, 50-61. Dempsey, K. (1990). The marginalisation of the elderly: an Australian case study. Australian Journal on Ageing, 9(3), 12-19. Department of Health. (2013). Review of the Patient Assistance Travel Scheme. Northern Territory Government. Department of Health. (2016). What has been achieved so far. Australian Government. Retrieved from https://agedcare.health.gov.au/reform/what-has-been-achieved-so-far Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development. (2015). Progress in Australian Regions: State of Regional Australia 2015. Australian Government. Retrieved from http://regional.gov.au/regional/publications/sora/index.aspx Department of Local Government and Communities. (2013). An Age-friendly WA: The Seniors Strategic Planning Framework 2012-2017. Government of Western Australia. Department of Regional Development. (2014). What is Royalties for Regions?. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.drd.wa.gov.au/rfr/whatisrfr/Pages/default.aspx

89

Department of Regional Development. (2016). Country Age Pension Fuel Card. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.drd.wa.gov.au/projects/Roads-and-Transport/Pages/Country-Age-Pension-Fuel-Card.aspx. Department of Training and Workforce Development. (2014). Profile of the Western Australian Population. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.dtwd.wa.gov.au/workforceplanninganddevelopment/westernaustraliasprofile/population/Documents/D14%200072568%20%20Update%20of%20the%20Population%20Profile%20on%20the%20Department%20s%20Website.pdf. Department of Transport. (2015). On-Demand Transport: A discussion paper for future innovation. Government of Western Australia. Diener., E. (1985). Happiness of the very wealthy, Social indicators research, 16(3), 263-274. Dods, S; Freyne, J; Alem, L; Nepal, S; Li, J; & Jang-Jaccard, J. (2012). Caring for the last 3%: telehealth potential and broadband implications for remote Australia. CSIRO. Dodson, J., Buchanan, N., Gleeson, B. & Sipe, N. (2006). Investigating the Social Dimensions of Transport Disadvantage – Towards New Concepts and Methods. Urban Research Program, Griffith University. Dow, B; Biggs, S; Kimberley, H; & Joosten, M. (2011). Age Encounters: exploring age and intergenerational identity. National Ageing Research Institute. Fouracre, P. (2001). Social Benefits of Rural Transport, TRL Limited. Retrieved from: http://www.transport-links.org/rtkb/english/Module%205%5C5_1a%20Social%20Benefits.pdf Fritze, J. (2008). Community Transport Snapshot Project. Victorian Council of Social Services. Retrieved from http://vcoss.org.au/documents/VCOSS%20docs/Transport/Community%20Transport-web.pdf. Gibson D, Rowland F, Braun P & Angus P. (2002). Ageing in place: before and after the 1997 aged care reforms. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Bulletin no.1. Cat. no. AUS 26. Retrieved from http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=6442467355. Giesel, F., Koehler, K. & Nowossadeck, E. (2013). Old and immobile in the country? Limited mobility of older people against the backdrop of an increasingly problematic health care in rural areas. Health Research, 56(10), 1418-1424. Gitlin, L. N. (2003). Conducting research on home environments: Lessons learned and new directions. Gerontologist, 43, 628-637. Godavarthy, R., Mattson, J., Ndembe, E. (2014) ‘Cost-Benefit Analysis of Rural and Small Urban Transit’. Report Prepared for the US Department of Transport. Grylls, B. (2011). State Budget 2011-12: Supporting our Community; Building the State (Royalties for Regions). Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/Pages/Barnett/2011/05/State-Budget-2011-12-Supporting-our-Community;-Building-the-State-(Royalties-for-Regions).aspx. Hine, J., & Mitchell, F. (2003). Transport disadvantage and social exclusion: exclusionary mechanisms in transport in urban Scotland: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

http://www.drd.wa.gov.au/projects/Roads-and-Transport/Pages/Country-Age-Pension-Fuel-Card.aspx

http://www.drd.wa.gov.au/projects/Roads-and-Transport/Pages/Country-Age-Pension-Fuel-Card.aspx

http://www.dtwd.wa.gov.au/workforceplanninganddevelopment/westernaustraliasprofile/population/Documents/D14%200072568%20%20Update%20of%20the%20Population%20Profile%20on%20the%20Department%20s%20Website.pdf



http://vcoss.org.au/documents/VCOSS%20docs/Transport/Community%20Transport-web.pdf

90

Horsley, L & Brewin, R. (2014). Inquiry announced to improve the Patient Assisted Travel Scheme. ABC Goldfields. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2014/02/28/3954493.htm. Jackson, R.L. (2007). Cluster Housing: What is its likely impact? Peer reviewed paper PhD, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia. Johnson, L. & Herath, S. (2004). Big Roads, No Transport: A Report of the Goodna and Gailes Community Mapping for Transport Improvements Study. Urban Policy Program, Griffith University. Kagi, J. (2016). AvonLink service puts WA Transport Minister at odds with Cabinet colleague. ABC Perth. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-03/wa-transport-minister-says-he-wants-to-replace-the-avonlink-tra/7472958 Kendig, H; Elias, A.M; Matwijiw, P; & Anstey, K. (2014). Developing Age-Friendly Cities and Communities in Australia. Journal of Ageing and Health, 26(8), 1390-1414. Kent County Council. (2011). Setting up a Community Transport Scheme in Kent and Medway. Rural Access to Services Programme. Retrieved from http://www.kentruralnetwork.org.uk/useful-publications/local-publications/Community%20Transport%20Toolkit.pdf Kerschner, H; & Hardin, J. (2006). Transportation Innovations for Seniors. The Community Transportation Association of America. Retrieved from http://www.ctaa.org/webmodules/webarticles/articlefiles/Senior_Rural_Innovations.pdf Kinnear, P. (2001). Population Ageing: Crisis of Transition? The Australian Institute. Retrieved from http://www.tai.org.au/node/908 Kulin Shire Council. (2015). Minutes of Ordinary Meeting Held 21 October 2015. Retrieved from http://kulin.wa.gov.au/file/MinutesOctober2015.pdf Litman, T. (2016). Evaluating Accessibility for Transportation Planning. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Mackett R. (2015). Improving accessibility for older people – Investing in a valuable asset’, Journal of Transport and Health, 2, 5-13. Mattson, J.W. (2011). Ageing and Mobility in Rural and Small Urban Areas. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 30(6), 700-718. McDowell, I., (2010). Measures of self-perceived well-being, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 69(1), 69–79. McIntosh, G & Phillips, J. (2003). Caring for the Elderly – an overview of aged care support and services in Australia. Parliamentary E-Brief on Social Policy Group, Parliament of Australia. Retrieved from http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/archive/agedcare.

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2014/02/28/3954493.htm

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/archive/agedcare

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/archive/agedcare

91

McKenna, M. (2012). A Case Study on the Impact of Rural Transport Provision on Older People in on Rural Area. Maynooth, Ireland. Murray, L. (2015). Age-friendly mobility’s: A trans disciplinary and intergenerational perspective. Journal of Transport and Health. National Broadband Network. (2016). Australia’s Broadband Network: FAQs. NBN Co Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.nbnco.com.au/ National Centre for Mobility Management. (2014). Transportation Coordination Enabled by Technology and Innovative Design. Boulder, Colorado. National Rural Health Alliance Inc. (2005). Older people and aged care in rural, regional and remote Australia. Aged and Community Services Australia. Nordbakke, S., & Schwanen, T., (2014). Well-being and Mobility: A Theoretical Framework and Literature Review Focusing on Older People, Mobilities, 9(1), 104-129. NRMA Insurance. (2010). Transport and mobility needs of ageing Australians: Discussion Paper. NSW Parliament House. New South Wales Committee on Ageing. (2000). Driving Miss Daisy in Country NSW: extending the transport options of older people living in rural NSW. NSW Government. Nordbakke, S., & Schwanen, T. (2014). Well-being and mobility: A theoretical framework and literature review focusing on older people. Mobilities, 9(1), 104-129. Nutter, M.A. (2016). City of Elderly Love: Philadelphia, an Age-Friendly and Accessible City. The Journal. Retrieved from http://journal.aarpinternational.org/a/b/2013/02/City-of-Elderly-Love-Philadelphia-an-Age-Friendly-and-Accessible-City O’Hehir, J. (2014). Age-Friendly Cities & Communities Literature Review. University of South Australia. Oldsberg, D & Winters, M. (2005). Ageing in Place: intergenerational and interfamilial housing transfers and shifts in later life. Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute. Osmond, J; Woodcok, A; Begley, J; & Frankova, K. (2014). The Future of Social Transport: a good idea, but… Coventry University, West Midlands, UK. Parliament of Western Australia. (2014). Aged-friendly WA? A challenge for government. Government of Western Australia. Philadelphia Corporation for Ageing. (2011). Laying the Foundation for an Age-Friendly Philadelphia: A Progress Report. Retrieved from http://www.pcacares.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/PCA_Age-Friendly_WhitePaper_web.pdf Portage Community Revitalisation Corporation. (2015). The State of Public Transportation in Portage la Prairie: A Discussion Paper. Status of Women Canada. Public Transport Authority. (2007). Disability Access and Inclusion Plan 2007-2012. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from

http://www.nbnco.com.au/

92

http://www.pta.wa.gov.au/portals/0/annualreports/2007/images/Disability%20Access%20Plan.pdf. Public Transport Authority. (2016), ‘Annual Report 2015-16’, Government of Western Australia. Available from: http://www.pta.wa.gov.au/Portals/15/annualreports/2016/index.html Regional Development Australia Wheatbelt. (2013). Wheatbelt Regional Plan 2013-2018. Australian Government. Retrieved from http://www.rdawheatbelt.com.au/images/documents/publications/RDA%20Wheatbelt%20Regional%20Plan%202013-18%20(Version%201%20Endorsed%20Sept%202013).pdf. RPS. (2014). Wheatbelt South Sub-Regional Economic Strategy. Wheatbelt Development Commission. Retrieved from http://www.wheatbelt.wa.gov.au/files/5714/1041/7002/Wheatbelt_South_Sub-Regional_Economic_Strategy_FINAL1_for_web.pdf Rosenberg, M. and Everitt, J. (2001). Planning for ageing populations: inside or outside the walls, Progress in Planning, 56(3), 119-168. Rural Health West, (2012). Wheatbelt – population and health status. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.ruralhealthwest.com.au/docs/outreach-in-the-outback-docs/wheatbelt-regional-needs-analysis-final-060513.pdf?sfv Ryser, L & Halseth, G. (2012). Resolving Mobility Constraints Impeding Rural Seniors’ Access to Regionalised Services. Journal of Ageing and Social Policy. 24(3), 328-344. Shergold, I., Parkhurst, G., & Musselwhite, C., (2012) Rural car dependence: an emerging barrier to community activity for older people, Transportation Planning and Technology, 35(1), 69-85. Shire of Dandaragan (2016), ‘Age Friendly Community Plan’. http://www.dandaragan.wa.gov.au/profiles/dandaragan/assets/clientdata/document-centre/publications/20160205_age_friendly_community_plan.pdf Shire of Gingin. (2016). Age Friendly Community Plan: Final Report. Retrieved from http://www.gingin.wa.gov.au/Profiles/gingin/Assets/ClientData/Document-Centre/Publications/Age_Friendly_Community_Plan_-_adopted.pdf Shire of Wongan-Ballidu. (2015). Ordinary Meeting of Council Minutes 16 December 2015. Retrieved from http://www.wongan.wa.gov.au/profiles/wongan/assets/clientdata/document-centre/meetings/1215_Council_Minutes.pdf Sixsmith, A & Sixsmith, J. (2008). Ageing in Place in the United Kingdom. Ageing International, 32(3), 219-235. Retrieved from doi:10.1007/s12126-008-9019-y Social Exclusion Unit. (2003). Making the Connections: Final Report on Transport and Social Exclusion. London. Retrieved from www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/---emp_policy/---invest/documents/publication/wcms_asist_8210.pdf Southern Mallee Transport Connections Partnership (2013). Home Page. Cohuna & District Hospital. Retrieved from http://www.smtcp.com.au/home.html

http://www.pta.wa.gov.au/portals/0/annualreports/2007/images/Disability%20Access%20Plan.pdf

http://www.pta.wa.gov.au/portals/0/annualreports/2007/images/Disability%20Access%20Plan.pdf

http://www.rdawheatbelt.com.au/images/documents/publications/RDA%20Wheatbelt%20Regional%20Plan%202013-18%20(Version%201%20Endorsed%20Sept%202013).pdf

http://www.rdawheatbelt.com.au/images/documents/publications/RDA%20Wheatbelt%20Regional%20Plan%202013-18%20(Version%201%20Endorsed%20Sept%202013).pdf

93

Southworth, F., Vogt, D. P., & Curlee, T. R. (2005). Rural transit systems benefits in Tennessee: methodology and an empirical study. Environment and Planning A, 37(5), 861-875. Stanley, J, Hensher, DA, Stanley, J, Currie, G, Greene, WH & Vella-Brodrick, D 2011, 'Social exclusion and the value of mobility', Journal of Transport Economics and Policy (JTEP), vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 197-222. Steer Davies Gleave and Transept. (n.d.). Rural Community Transport: A Guide to Good Practice. County Council and Transport Groups. Retrieved from http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/159230/0043330.pdf Stones, D & Gullifer, J. (2016). At home it’s just so much easier to be yourself: older adults’ perceptions of ageing in place. Ageing and Society, 36(3), 449-481. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X14001214 Strutt, J. (2014). Seniors’ discount petrol card inequitable, says Ageing Council. ABC News, Perth. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-25/ageing-group-labels-seniors-petrol-concession-inequitable/5550614. Transit Cooperative Research Program. (2011). Innovative Rural Transit Services. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. Tonts, M. (1998). Rural Restructuring, Policy Change and Uneven Development in the Central Wheatbelt of Western Australia. Thesis for Doctor of Philosophy, Curtin University of Technology, Western Australia. Tonts, M (2004). Spatially Uneven Development: Government Policy and Rural Reform in the Wheatbelt of Western Australia. Anthropoligcal Forum, 14(3), 237-252. Transcript of Evidence. (2014). Ms Wendy Newman, Chief Executive Officer, Wheatbelt Development Commission, 20 August 2014. Retrieved from http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/commit.nsf/(Evidence+Lookup+by+Com+ID)/6CC75C1AB0C81BB248257D3F0016DA3E/$file/20140908+Wendy+Newman+transcript+FINAL.pdf. Transport for NSW. (2013). Western regional transport plan. NSW Government. Retrieved from http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/b2b/publications/western-regional-transport-plan.pdf Transwa. (2016). Regional Travel Bookings. Public Transport Authority. Retrieved from https://www.Transwa.wa.gov.au/. Verso Consulting. (2014). National Review of Community Transport under the Commonwealth HACC Program: Final Report. Department of Social Services. Warner, M; Homsy, G; & Greenhouse, E. (2010). Multi-generational community planning: Linking the needs of children and older adults. Department of City and Regional, Cornell University. Western Australia Country Health Service. (2012). Wheatbelt – population and health status. Government of Western Australia.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-25/ageing-group-labels-seniors-petrol-concession-inequitable/5550614

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-25/ageing-group-labels-seniors-petrol-concession-inequitable/5550614

http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/commit.nsf/(Evidence+Lookup+by+Com+ID)/6CC75C1AB0C81BB248257D3F0016DA3E/$file/20140908+Wendy+Newman+transcript+FINAL.pdf



https://www.transwa.wa.gov.au/

94

Western Australia Country Health Services. (2013). Coastal Wheatbelt and Moora Service Plan 2012-2022. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.wacountry.health.wa.gov.au/fileadmin/sections/publications/eDoc_-_CO_-_Coastal_Wheatbelt_Service_Plan__ED-CO-12-17932_.pdf. Western Australia Country Health Services. (2016). Patient Assisted Travel Scheme (PATS) – Scheme overview. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.wacountry.health.wa.gov.au/index.php?id=628. Western Australia Country Health Service. (2016). Telehealth. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.wacountry.health.wa.gov.au/telehealth Western Australian Planning Commission. (2010). Directions 2031 and beyond. Department of Planning. Retrieved from http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/publications/826.asp Western Australian Planning Commission. (2012a). Population Report No. 7, 2006 to 2026. Excel table, Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/publications/6195.asp. Western Australian Planning Commission. (2012b). Guidelines for preparation of integrated transport plans. Department of Planning. Retrieved from http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/dop_pub_pdf/guidelines_integrated_transport_whole.pdf Wheatbelt Development Commission. (2014). Wheatbelt Aged Support and Care Solutions – Implementation Plan. Department of Regional Development, Government of Western Australia. Wheatbelt Development Commission. (2016a). Local Governments. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.wheatbelt.wa.gov.au/our-region/local-governments/. Wheatbelt Development Commission. (2016b). Creating Age Friendly Communities Small Value Grant Scheme. Government of Western Australia. Retrieved from http://www.wheatbelt.wa.gov.au/funding/creating-age-friendly-communities-small-value-grant-scheme/ Wheatbelt Workforce Development Alliance. (2012). Wheatbelt workforce development plan 2013-2016. Department of Training and Workforce Development, Government of Western Australia. Whelan, M., Langford, J., Oxley, J., Koppel, S. & Charlton, J. (2006). The Elderly and Mobility: A Review of the Literature. Monash University Accident Research Centre. Retrieved from http://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/216530/muarc255.pdf World Health Organisation. (2007). Global Age-Friendly Cities: A Guide. France. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Global_age_friendly_cities_Guide_English.pdf

http://www.wacountry.health.wa.gov.au/fileadmin/sections/publications/eDoc_-_CO_-_Coastal_Wheatbelt_Service_Plan__ED-CO-12-17932_.pdf

http://www.wacountry.health.wa.gov.au/fileadmin/sections/publications/eDoc_-_CO_-_Coastal_Wheatbelt_Service_Plan__ED-CO-12-17932_.pdf

http://www.wacountry.health.wa.gov.au/index.php?id=628

http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/publications/6195.asp

http://www.wheatbelt.wa.gov.au/our-region/local-governments/

9.0 APPENDIX

APPENDIX A – COMMUNITY BUS PARTICIPANT SURVEY

PRE-SCREENING SURVEY

How did you find out about this service?

.

.

Before this service was available, how did you access services in Joondalup?

.

.

Describe your satisfaction with the previous transport arrangement (in terms of frequency, cost, convenience).

.

.

How frequently did you visit the regional centre?

.

.

How frequently did you need to visit the regional centre?

.

.

How long did your journey take?

.

.

96

COMMUNITY SURVEY

Name: .

What is your gender?

Male Female

What is your age?

Under 50 50 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84 85 and over

Where do you live? .

Do you participate in volunteer or paid work?

Yes No If “Yes” Hours a week of paid work: .

Hours a week of volunteer work: .

BACKGROUND Is this the first time you have completed this survey? Yes No

How many times have you used this bus service? . How did you find out about this service? . Where is your destination? . What is your main reason for visiting your destination today? Health Care Shopping Social Business Other

If “Other”, please specify: . Will you be using this service for your return trip? Yes No If “No”, how will you be returning? .

YOUR MOBILITY How do you mainly get around your town? Walk Cycle Drive Gopher Bus

Do you use a mobility aid? Yes No If “Yes”, please specify: . Do you have access to a car that you are able to drive yourself? Yes No How much do you agree or disagree with the following:

1 Strongly

2 3 4 5 Strongly

97

disagree agree It is easy for me to access medical services. It is easy for me to access retail outlets. It is easy for me to access social activities. I am able to travel when I need to. I am able to physically enter and exit a bus without assistance

I need some assistance getting around my community.

I rely on others for transport. I can find someone to provide assistance when transport is not available.

QUALITY OF LIFE

How often do you find that your mobility prevents you from participating in the following:

1 It is impossible for me to participate

2 3 4 5 I am always able

to participate

A hobby or leisure activity

Community meetings

Meeting with friends or other social events

How often are you helped with your mobility or travel by:

1 Not at all

2 3 4 5 Any time day

or night

Immediate family

Extended family

Friends or neighbours?

ABOUT THIS SERVICE

How satisfied are you with this service in terms of: 1 2 3 4 5 Very

dissatisfied Very

satisfied Convenience of timetable – departure and drop off time

Convenience of timetable – day of week

98

Convenience of service frequency – times per month

Ease of booking service Affordability of service (compared to private transport)

Ease of getting to collection point in your town

Ease of boarding bus Adequate rest stops Convenience of drop-off location at destination

Convenience of length of time spent at destination

Comfort whilst waiting for the bus for return trip

Comfort on the journey

Has this service enabled you to participate in social activities, either within your town or outside of it? If so, how? .

.

.

Does this service help you to access other health and social services? If so, how? .

.

.

Describe your visit to Joondalup today (were you happy with the drop off point, were you comfortable when you were waiting for the bus, did you have a long wait to get the service home)? .

.

.

.

.

Is this service being communicated effectively in your community? Do you have any suggestions for improvement? .

.

.

.

.

Do you have any other recommendations to improve this service? .

.

.

99

APPENDIX B – PUBLIC TRANSPORT OPTIONS IN THE WHEATBELT

Public Transport Service

Description

Transwa Prospector

Passenger railway service operating 7 days a week from East Perth to Kalgoorlie via Merredin. Stops include Toodyay, Northam, Meckering, Cunderdin, Tammin, Kellerberrin, Doodlakine, Hines Hill, Merredin, Burracoppin, Carrabin, Bodallin, Moorine Rock, Southern Cross and Koolyanobbing

Transwa AvonLink

Commuter train service between Northam and Midland via Toodyay, five days a week, twice daily

Transwa MerredinLink

AvonLink extended train journeys, three days a week to Merredin.

Transwa bus fleet

Various bus services running through the Wheatbelt and Regional WA including;

GE1 Perth to Esperance (via Jerramungup/Dumbleyung) – 3 days a week to Esperance, 4 days a week from Esperance

GE2 Perth to Esperance (via Kulin/Hyden) – 3 days a week to Esperance, 2 days a week from Esperance

GS1 Perth to Albany (via Williams/Kojonup) – everyday both ways

GS2 Perth to Albany (via Gnowangerup/Katanning and Northam/Narrogin) – everyday both ways

N2 Perth to Geraldton (via Moora/Kalbarri) – 4 days a week to Geraldton, 4 days a week from Geraldton

N3 Perth to Geraldton (via Northam/Mullewa) – 2 days a week to Geraldton, 2 days a week from Geraldton

N5 Perth to Geraldton (via Jurien Bay) – 2 days a week to Geraldton, 2 days a week from Geraldton

Source: Links from Regional Travel Bookings, 2016 (Transwa 2016)

100

APPENDIX C – EXISTING COMMUNITY TRANSPORT IN SPECIFIC WHEATBELT LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREAS


Community Transport Available

Average price (standard resident) for 100km round-trip

Average price (senior resident) for 100km round-trip

Bond paid (if applicable)

Beverley Community Bus for hire to residents for $1.55/km

$155 $155 $0

Brookton Community Bus for hire to residents for $1/km (minimum charge of $50), and a bond of $330, bus trailer available for $35/day

$100 $100 $330

Corrigin Community Bus for hire to residents, for 60c/km

$60 $60 $0

Cunderdin Community Bus for hire to residents for 66c/km, with casual hire for senior citizens

$66 $0 $0

Dowerin Community Bus for hire to residents for 70c/km, or 52.5c/km for aged pensioners

$70 $52.50 $0

Gingin Community Bus for hire to residents for $1.60/km or 80c/km for aged pensioner groups, with a bond of $200

$160 $80 $200

Goomalling Community Bus for hire to residents, for $1.10/km Bus tours once a month to various destinations. Usually around $5 for the trip

$110 $110 $0

Kulin Community Bus for hire to residents for $1/km, with a bond of $50, bus trailer available for $55.70/day

$100 $100 $50

Moora Community Bus for hire to residents for $236.90/day or $118.50/day for aged pensioner groups

$236.90 $118.50 $0

Mt Marshall Community Bus for hire to residents for 88c/km (minimum charge of $55)

$88 $88 $0

Northam Wundowie/Northam Community Bus Community for hire to residents for $1.10/km, with a bond of $50

$110 $110 $50

101

Quairading Community Bus for hire to residents for $1.20, plus hire charge of $25 and a bond of $100

$145 $145 $100

Wagin Community Bus for hire to residents for 70c/km, with a bond of $150

$70 $70 $150

Westonia Community Bus for hire to residents for 88c/km

$88 $88 $0

Wickepin Community bus for hire to residents for 90cents/km, with a bond of $100

$90 $90 $100

Wongan-Ballidu

Large Community Bus for hire to residents for $1.25/km, or $0.90/km for small bus or $0.40/km under PATS scheme

$125 $125 $0

Wyalkatchem Community Bus for hire to residents for 70c/km, with a bond of $100

$70 $70 $100

Yilgarn Community Bus for hire to residents for 60c/km, or community car hire for 15c/km

$60 $60 $0

York Community Bus for hire to residents for $1.80/km, bond required but unspecified

$180 $180 $0

Source: Links from Local Governments, 2016 (Wheatbelt Development Commission 2016)

102

APPENDIX D – RESEARCH BREAKDOWN OF LITERATURE REVIEWED

ID Global Publication Location Document Medium

Key Findings

1 WHO: World Health Organisation (2007), ‘Global Age-friendly Cities: A Guide’, France.

World wide

International Agency Publication

Bottom-up participatory approach involves older people analysing and expressing their situation to inform government policy (recommended)

Considerations Age friendly vehicles – wheelchair accessible, low-floor buses etc. Clear communication and information on bus schedules, costs and services Driver sensitivity to older passengers Safety and comfort Availability of shelter at transport stops Frequent and reliable services Affordability

Case Study – Portage la Prairie (Canada) Community Volunteer Drivers Shuttle buses provided by grocery stores and volunteer driver services Design is currently being altered with involvement from regular users Highlighted importance of a variety of information avenues, as there is not one

single mechanism that will reach all older adults e.g. information relevant to seniors could be made available to younger individuals who can bring it to the attention of a relative/neighbour, or information can be distributed through meals on wheels, or other aged care service providers

2 Portage Community Revitalisation Corporation (2015), ‘The State of Public Transportation in Portage la Prairie: A Discussion Paper’, Status of Women Canada.

Portage la Prairie, Canada

Community Discussion paper

Case Study Colorado Paratransit Call-up, on-demand, door-to-door transportation Provided by non-profit organisation Via Provided transportation from any origin to any destination in the service area $2 one way within communities and $4 one way between communities – no one is

turned away if they cannot pay due to low income Portage HandiVan for seniors in rural areas

Cost of $0.85/km (for general users) Portage Service for Seniors Inc. uses volunteers as drivers

103

Trips can run for up to 2 hours and cost $15 for seniors Trips that run for longer e.g. 5 hours can cost up to $70

3 Steer Davies Gleave and Transept (n.d.), ‘Rural Community Transport’, County Council and Transport Groups

CarmarthenShire, United Kingdom

Local Government User Guide

CarmarthenShire County Cars 160 volunteers, of which 115 drive passengers throughout the year Aimed at meeting rural transport needs, targeting elderly singles Rural county in West Wales with a population of 169,000, dispersed population Only spans 75km in length (2395km2) however it takes 1hr 25mins to drive from one

end to the other Service provided by County Council and Women’s Royal Voluntary Service, at a

cost of approximately £40,000 per annum to the County Council Started in 1977 and changes over time to meet changing needs Individual calls the advertised number at least 24hrs before required (except in

emergencies) the organiser asks around the pool of drivers until one is available the driver takes the person to their destination and notes mileage to reclaim cost from County Council if the driver cannot return the passenger after their errand, another driver will be found for the return journey

23% of trips for shopping, 63% health related, 80% of users are retired 4 Kent County Council

(2011), ‘Setting up a Community Transport Scheme in Kent and Medway’, Rural Access to Services Programme

Kent, United Kingdom

Local Government User Guide

Kent and Medway use multiple community transport service options to fill the gaps for the 13% of the population in rural areas that don’t have access to private transportation

Swale Volunteer Centre – social car scheme with volunteer demand response car transport door to door

Medway Mobility – Dial-a-Ride service for elderly or frail people Meopham Community Bus – Parish Council operates the service twice a week to

Gravesend and back (30min trip one-way) 5 Davison et al. (2014),

‘A survey of demand responsive transport in Great Britain’, Transport Policy, vol. 31, pp. 47-54.

Great Britain Academic – journal article

Across a survey of demand response transport options (369 schemes all up) over 50% required a subsidy of £5 per person per trip, with this increasing in rural areas

The least sustainable schemes (long-term) appeared to be those that had a cost over £10 per person

Key motivations were social need and improving accessibility, as well as to ‘fill the gap’ caused by withdrawn services

Demand response transport increasingly identified as a ‘deep rural product’ rather than an urban solution

104

Growing role for technology to assist with coordination and booking Level of flexibility needs to be adjusted to each specific area Increased focus on making taxis more cost effective Marketing is essential to increase awareness and good communication with

stakeholders and staff is key to a positive user experience The future of demand response transport is dependent on the economy and

availability of funding 6 Davison et al. (2012),

‘Identifying potential market niches for Demand Responsive Transport’, Research in Transportation Business and Management, vol. 3, pp. 50-61.

United States, with examples from around the World

Academic – journal article

Technology plays the greatest role in responding to market development opportunities and market niche demand primarily in enabling flexible booking and providing real time information

In practice, many global examples of DRT failing. Often due to the type and/or scale of DRT is not appropriate for the market served

Improved technology is key to service provision – assuming it is effective Increasing government interest in using DRT to address social inclusion/accessibility

goals DRT only profitable in limited, niche markets but can deliver other economic benefits

i.e. more cost effective than alternative transport options in rural areas Barriers to success More complex systems Availability of technology Trust/effectiveness of technology The need to pre-book services – difficult to attract less certain markets Awareness – often not recognised within traditional transport options Socio-cultural/public perception of DRT as an unviable transport option

7 Murray (2015), ‘Age-friendly mobility’s: A trans disciplinary and intergenerational perspective’, Journal of Transport and Health

World wide Academic – journal article

Current approaches to ageing and mobility tend to adopt relatively discrete categories of age – should instead focus on making cities friendly to all-ages

Tendency to view older people as an homologous group, without recognising the diverse array of needs and capabilities within the aged population

Mobility issues more likely related to inequalities in class and gender

105

8 Osmond, J et al. (2014), ‘The Future of Social Transport: a good idea, but…’ Coventry University, West Midlands, UK.

United Kingdom and greater Europe

Academic –Conference proceedings

Motivators for using social/community transport options include financial savings, environmental concerns, poor public transport, low car ownership, parking problems, mobility issues, close-knit communities

Barriers include unavailability of cars/vehicles, difficult booking systems, distance to closest stands, membership requirements, car ownership being associated with lifestyle choice/identity, lack or awareness of schemes, fear of sharing with strangers, personal safety, security issues, poor driving/speeding of driver, problems with sharing costs, gender of car sharing patrons, interaction within the vehicle, insurance worries, lack of national and Local Government support, lack of incentives, lack of internet connection, lack of flexibility, additional journey length, inertia, lack of awareness, lack of trust of strangers, lack of options, longer journey length

Overall recommendation that schemes must produce clear and simple information on the benefits, incentives and practicalities, underpinned by a user-friendly technology platform

Scheme should offer a cost and environmental impact calculator 9 Mackett, R (2015),

‘Improving accessibility for older people – Investing in a valuable asset’, Journal of Transport and Health, vol. 2, pp. 5 – 13.

United Kingdom Academic – journal article

Costs to society for people aged 65 + state pension payments, age-related welfare payments, age-related health care

Contribution to society from people aged 65+ social care, childcare, volunteering, donations, asset transfers to family members, expenditure including the wider value through multiplier effects (e.g. spending on travel to destination, shopping and leisure activities)

In monetary units, older people have a ratio of contributions to costs of 1.29 to 1 improving accessibility for older people would therefore be a good investment in a valuable asset (and one that is growing, to 1.35 to 1 in 2030)

Based on a random sample of 1445 people aged 60+, 12% would like to visit family more often with the principle barriers being direct e.g. cost, convenience of service

8% would like to participate more in leisure or sport activities It is often the interaction between people’s capabilities and the environment that

create the barriers Main barriers to mobility for most is not associated with abilities but rather with the

transport system and socio-environmental factors In rural areas it is recommended that the future of transport involves a mixture of

106

buses, community transport, taxis and lift giving with good publicity and reliable services

10 Kerschner, H & Hardin, J (2006), ‘Transportation Innovations for Seniors’, The Community Transportation Association of America

Rural America Local Agency Community Brochure

Seniors will only use public transportation if they are treated with dignity and have confidence that their quality of life needs will be met

Communication is central, and technology is seen as an important to improving schedules and customer service

5 A’s of senior friendly transportation Availability – ensuring seniors know about the service Acceptability – treating seniors like customers, fielding drivers and staff who are

sensitive to the needs of seniors, making services less intimidating and providing acceptable vehicles

Accessibility – ensuring seniors know how to use the service Adaptability – making services more flexible Affordability – making sure service is affordable, operating efficiently and cost-

effectively It is suggested that word of mouth is one of the most effective methods of improving

patronage in regional community transport 11 McKenna, M (2006),

‘A Case Study on the Impact of Rural Transport Provision on Older People in on Rural Area’, Maynooth, Ireland

Ireland Academic – adapted from BSc rural development Thesis

“When I see people confined to the house I know what it means to them to get on the bus, have a laugh, a chat, and get their shopping down. I am amazed at how few opportunities some people have to get out and visit their neighbouring villages not many miles away.’ – Peggy, a Flexibus user

“We love it, it’s great to be brought to the door and back. My husband died last year and I never learned to drive. I depend on my son but he is working and has a family. I hate to disturb him.” – Philomena

“I’m 86 widowed since I was 49. All my children live in England. My neighbours are either working or too old like myself. I never see anyone from one end of the week to the next. I feel very safe on Flexibus” - Mazie

Flexibus – bus runs for 1.5hrs door-to-door through rural towns once a week Meath County – approx. 70km wide with population density varying throughout,

approximately 25 persons/km2 in 36 of 92 District Electoral Divisions 2% of the population live alone and are over 65 years old (3520 people) Transport found as one of the key obstacles to health and well-being for elderly

107

Availability of services e.g. post offices and banks in rural areas have declined due to service rationalisation results in greater need for rural residents to travel outside their local area for essential services

19% of survey respondents stated they rarely or never have a car available to them (mostly older women, or people with lower income)

Initially run with 2 pilot projects (1999), by 2005 Flexibus has 21 regular services and was an integral part of the community

Flexibus also provided 18 scheduled dial-a-ride services for those who could not be catered for by the usual flexibus schedule

The bus allows people of all ages if necessary, with 94% of users being over 55 When passengers were asked if there were any destinations they would like to go to

the highest response rate was for ‘Anywhere’ (32.9%), followed by the ‘shopping centre’ (31.4%)

Before flexibus, 20.8% of users said they were unable to travel at all, 30.8% relied on family and 20% relied on neighbours

APPENDIX E – MAP OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TELEHEALTH LOCATION

109

APPENDIX F – HEALTH SERVICES AVAILABLE AT EACH PARTICIPATING REGIONAL CENTRE

Service Available Narrogin

Health Service Northam Health Service

Joondalup Health Campus

Aged Care and Rehabilitation

Anesthetics

Antenatal/Postnatal Care

Cardiology

Chemotherapy

Community Aged Care Packages

Ear, nose and throat

Elective surgery

Emergency medicine

Gastroenterology

General medicine

General surgery

Gynecology

Infectious diseases

Intensive care

Maternity

Mental Health / Psychiatry

Neurology

Obstetrics

Oncology

Ophthalmology

Orthopedics

Outpatients

Pediatric medicine

Pediatric surgery

Pain management

Palliative care

Plastic and reconstructive surgery

Renal

Respiratory

Rheumatology

Spinal surgery

Urology

Vascular Surgery

X-Ray Services

110

APPENDIX G – QUANTIFYING SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIFFERENCES AND FACTORS OF TRANSPORT DISADVANTAGE

(Figures considered higher in transport disadvantage than the State average are shaded red. Data derived from ABS 2011 Census)


SEIFA score

Weekly Income Average

Unemployment Rate (%)

% Female % Over the Age of 65

% Born Outside of Australia

Beverley (S) 942 404 3.2 48.43 24.92 21.79 Brookton (S) 954 456 6.4 49.20 23.59 17.4 Bruce Rock (S) 971 495 2.3 49.85 17.47 16.03 Chittering (S) 1040 565 1.7 49.16 12.92 29.03 Corrigin (S) 987 539 3.8 49.20 20.99 13.31 Cuballing (S) 1005 469 2.9 50.35 16.05 16.51 Cunderdin (S) 1004 510 2.4 47.05 15.10 20.38 Dalwallinu (S) 1031 681 1.7 46.48 14.23 17.63 Dandaragan (S) 1003 573 1.7 45.85 17.71 25.13 Dowerin (S) 989 518 1.2 48.60 17.82 11.19 Dumbleyung (S) 1018 497 4.2 46.29 16.80 16.47 Gingin (S) 992 472 2.1 48.18 18.92 30.87 Goomalling (S) 973 474 4.3 50.15 17.36 17.16 Kellerberrin (S) 910 391 2.8 49.66 21.17 14.54 Kondinin (S) 993 610 3.3 42.56 11.91 19.98 Koorda (S) 979 502 1.6 46.31 17.28 14.06 Kulin (S) 1011 540 1.7 47.24 12.38 13.1 Lake Grace (S) 1042 616 1.0 46.64 10.96 17.69 Merredin (S) 983 599 2.5 47.18 12.85 20.15 Moora (S) 987 590 2.4 49.64 12.75 17.31 Mount Marshall (S) 1048 613 1.6 45.47 10.49 11.32 Mukinbudin (S) 1020 550 0.9 47.08 18.31 14.29 Narembeen (S) 1005 538 1.8 48.47 21.84 17.55 Narrogin (S) 1065 532 6.7 45.42 10.18 17.28 Narrogin (T) 942 506 6.7 51.77 15.33 18.65 Northam (S) 947 517 4.4 50.69 15.25 24.72 Nungarin (S) 967 433 3.6 43.72 16.02 19.48 Pingelly (S) 903 411 8.3 48.89 20.00 19.57 Quairading (S) 931 486 5.4 51.63 21.88 12.86 Tammin (S) 987 434 5.8 42.68 14.64 16.13 Toodyay (S) 994 497 2.5 50.33 15.80 29.71 Trayning (S) 941 511 3.2 45.53 19.88 14.99 Victoria Plains (S) 1017 537 0.9 43.89 12.11 21.78 Wagin (S) 956 460 5.5 49.13 19.66 20.04 Wandering (S) 1041 738 8.5 48.63 14.38 18.26 West Arthur (S) 1036 500 3.9 47.83 16.02 13.5 Westonia (S) 995 774 2.2 39.86 14.86 21.74 Wickepin (S) 977 496 3.8 48.26 16.58 13.37 Williams (S) 1033 611 1.0 47.92 14.91 13.27 Wongan-Ballidu (S) 990 645 2.2 48.54 12.06 15.55 Wyalkatchem (S) 944 430 2.5 48.66 27.29 22.14 Yilgarn (S) 984 945 1.9 38.31 8.89 28.38 York (S) 983 477 2.5 50.31 19.47 24.24 STATE AVERAGE 1021 1097 4.2 49.79 12 33

111

APPENDIX H – ADVERTISING: HYDEN TO NARROGIN PILOT

113

APPENDIX I – QUESTION GUIDE AND ANSWERS FOR SHIRE STAFF AND BUS DRIVER ACROSS ALL THREE PILOTS

1. SHIRE OF KONDININ

How did you advertise and promote the service? (Materials used, channels taken)

• Local newspapers across the relevant Local Governments and towns;

• Mailbox drop to residents on Shire of Kondinin;

• Posters put up on Shire noticeboards throughput towns.

• Facebook posts. Have the Shire received any formal feedback on the service or the materials used to advertise

No

Are you aware of any people who would be unaware of this service?

No

How could advertising reach a wider market?

The service was advertised comprehensively in Shire of Kondinin and unsure how it could reach wider market. Unsure how well the service was marketed in Kulin as uptake was low.

Do you think technology could be incorporated into the pilot? I.e. smartphone updates to passengers

No – more traditional forms of advertising suit the target market.

What do you think the existing and future demand is for these services?

• Yes, however it was noted that more frail older people to resistant to use the service. This was mainly due to concerns around how they would get around once arriving in Narrogin.

• Demand would likely be increased by promoting the service to the entire community (not just older people)

Do you think the service should continue? Yes - however elements could be changed to make it more successful.

Do you think the route of the pilot was suitable?

Yes – unsure whether it needed to go from Hyden as there was low uptake.

Do you think the location of pick-up and drop-off was suitable?

Yes – the bus driver provided pick-up from passenger’s houses which was beneficial to the older bus users.

Did you notice any higher use periods or ‘peak periods’ in the running of the service?

None noted.

Do you think the service could be expanded for all people in the community?

Yes – this would assist in making the service more viable.

What do you think worked well?

• Cost was affordable for users • Collection from user’s homes

Do you think this service is viable in the long-term?

Yes, however would be more viable if held monthly and promoted to whole community.

114

Do you think this service is important in the community?

Yes, important in retaining independence

What didn’t work well? Options and transport at destination. More frail aged people were discouraged to use service for this reason.

What were the biggest barriers to the service?

• Lack of coordination at destination. Availability of Gophers or similar in Narrogin would allow older people to get around town easier.

How could the service be improved?

• Better coordination at destination (so older / more frail people are able to get around).

• More social opportunities – tie in with local events and functions

What do you know about the demographic of people using the service?

NA – Please refer to Bus Driver/User focus group feedback.

Can you shed any light on any stories of people using the service? I.e. anything that conveys the importance of the service


What were the benefits to users of the service?


How was the service managed in the Shire?

The Shire found the service easy to manage. With the exception of the initial promotion, it required few resources to administer.

How much time (approximately) was committed to the running of the pilot?

Limited – mainly financial management and issuing invoices to WDC.

Was the booking system effective? Yes – simple system that worked well. Would you make any changes to the management or booking system?

No – worked well between the 3 Shires.

How important is the driver for the success of this project?

Very – important to have a dedicated driver. Remunerating driver is important to success.

Do you think the price was fair? Should it be more or less?

Yes – although agreed that the service needs to be subsidised for users.

What light can you shed on the experience of working with another Shire in the pilots?

Partnership with other Local Governments worked well.

Are there any recommendations for how it could be better run between Shires?

No – worked well as it was managed.

Do you know of any comparable or competing transport services in or around the Shire?

• Only HACC – however non-HACC clients are unable to access HACC services.

• A future service could be better aligned with HACC.

Are there any opportunities for the Shire to engage with HACC services?

• Not HACC services directly – however the service could collaborate more closely with HACC so that the community has a better understanding of the differences in services.

Were there any issues with resource availability for the pilot?

None noted.

How best do you think the project could Local Government has capacity to provide transport infrastructure, administer and

115

be funded, to be sustainable in the future?

manage the service as well as promote locally. However, the capacity to fund service is out of the realm of Local Government responsibility and is something that should be funded by the State in partnership with Local Government.

2. BUS OPERATOR JURIEN BAY - JOONDALUP

Do you think that the way it was advertised was effective?

Yes, maybe a letter box drops or flyer is another option


There have been a few people that did not know about the service,

How do you think advertising could reach a wider market?

Letter box drop, local paper and Shire news Create a Face Book Page for this service


This would only benefit a small number or the younger side, the targetted people for this trial would not benefit

How do you perceive the existing and future demand is for these services?

The demand for this service is defiantly there, the number of passengers has increased over the last 3 weeks and is steady

Do you think the service should continue?

Yes

Do you think the service could run year round, or would be better in peak periods?

This service needs to be all year round as its for Medical services and not focused on a seasonal outing

Do you think the route of the pilot was suitable?

Yes


Yes


Not at the moment

What do you think worked well? It’s a good outing for the older generation to meet new people and chat, they have formed a coffee group already with the regulars on the bus

Do you think this service is viable in the long-term?

Yes, I can see this service growing


Extremely important, I can see just from a social outing this is important and the regular passengers look forward to it.

What didn’t work well? What were the biggest barriers to the service?

Finding a bus that was suitable, we now understand that we need and are providing that but will upgrade to something with wheelchair access in the future. The booking system was very confusing at the start and some info was not given or inconsistent, we now have this working well but can be slightly improved

116

How could the service be improved? Between myself and the Shires we could improve the booking system and process


The service has been targeting the aged demographic, there would be more passengers if this was advertised as a community service available to everyone


The regular small group of ladies that use the service every week look forward catching up and chatting, there have also been a number of people using the service for medical reasons. Family catch ups have been common as we drop at the bus/train station and it’s easy to commute from here


From an operators prospective the price is too cheap but from an aged passenger its very reasonable, I think a structured price could work where seniors or aged 50+ pay the current price but anyone under this pay slightly more only additional $10 or something along these lines.

What light can you shed on the experience of working with the Shire in the pilot? I.e. was communication clear

Working with the Shires has been good, updating booking systems and times on advertising, this is something that will only become more efficient


The only other service come from Transwa or Integrity Coach lines From Jurien its $44 one-way

3. SHIRE OF WONGAN BALLIDU

How did you advertise and promote the service? (Materials used, channels taken)

Radio, local newsletter each week, large timetable sign in the CRC, pamphlets in the Shire and CRC offices. Word of mouth seemed to be the most effective way of promoting the service

Have the Shire received any formal feedback on the service or the materials used to advertise

No. In Vic Plains, could have been more information


No

How could advertising reach a wider market?

Most advertising avenues were taken in Wongan.


No, it’s not anticipated that this would be an effective way for those who used the pilot service

What do you think the existing and future demand is for these services?

There is demand in both communities as there is nothing in existence that provide this service

Do you think the service should continue? Yes, the CRC is looking into a how the service could be continued

Do you think the route of the pilot was Yes, there were a few routes taken. When

117

suitable?

there were only Wongan passengers the pilot went through Goomalling. The route through Victoria Plains went through Irish town or Toodyay. The passengers particularly enjoyed the scenery through Toodyay.


Yes, there were some door to door drop off and pick-ups as well.


The serviced peaked towards the end once the word had got around about it.

Do you think the service could be expanded for all people in the community?

It could be however it is more of a priority for the aged and it would be preferred if the service was mostly focused on providing a service for them as it was in the pilot.

What do you think worked well? Do you think this service is viable in the long-term?

There would need to be a minimum number, potential option to use the Shire pool care, would run fortnightly at most. A continuing service would need to have dedicated resourced


Had a huge impact on the users of the service. There is no way for older residents who cannot drive to get out of the town. The older residents in town are very loyal to local businesses and services however there are somethings that they cannot access therefor the service to Northam gave them the opportunity to do so.

What didn’t work well?

There was a slow take up. There were changes in the staff at the CRC which lead to inconsistencies in which staff member was working on the service.

What were the biggest barriers to the service?

Inconsistent resourcing.

How could the service be improved? Minimum number, potential option to use the Shire pool care, would run fortnightly at most. A continuing service would need to have dedicated resourced New bus!!


Older demographic. Accessing Northam for 50% social/ shopping, 50% health and medical. Some cannot drive.


Alec- was the champion of the service in the end, when he returned to town from holiday he used the service weekly and spread the word about how great it was. A lady from Calingiri who had suffered a stroke used the service regularly towards the end with her husband to access physio in Northam. She required the wheelchair lift in the bus.

What were the benefits to users of the service?

Access to services that cannot be access in Wongan. There are visiting services to Wongan however they are often booked out months in advance so being able to access

118

them in Northam was a great benefit. There were also the social benefits.

How was the service managed in the Shire?

About ½ an hour a week was spent on the booking system as well as time printing and circulating advertising material. The time was minimum

How much time (approximately) was committed to the running of the pilot?

As above.

Was the booking system effective?

Yes, there were some issues at the Shire of Vic Plains end because they were unfamiliar with the system.

Would you make any changes to the management or booking system?

Some training in the booking system.

How important is the driver for the success of this project?

Very! The flexibility and personality of the driver is very important for the passengers to feel comfortable.


Yes, the price was good.

What light can you shed on the experience of working with another Shire in the pilots?

It worked well, ticketing system issues as mentioned above.

Are there any recommendations for how it could be better run between Shires?

Training on ticketing. More regular contact.


No. there is an elderly man in Wonga who takes people to appointments however this is not sustainable due to his age.

Are there any opportunities for the Shire to engage with HACC services?

Were there any issues with resource availability for the pilot?

No

How best do you think the project could be funded, to be sustainable in the future?

It may be something that council are interested in funding as catering for the aged demographic in the town is a priority.

119

APPENDIX J – OPERATIONAL DATA FOR HYDEN TO NARROGIN PILOT TRANSPORT SERVICE

Eight completed or partially completed operational records were received from the Narrogin service. Seven of eight trips originated from Kondinin. On one occasion the service originated from Hyden, which is probably indicates no passengers from Hyden (note 2 WDC boarded at Hyden). The table below lists the revenue and cost for bus service. Date Service time Passengers Revenue ($) Operating Cost ($)

Fuel Driver Others Total 04/02/16 8:00-11:00

(Hyden to Narrogin) 3:15-5:10 (Narrogin to Hyden)

2 & 2 WDC 20 106.20 272.62 29.95** 383.10

18/02/16 9:00-10:30 (Kondinin to Narrogin) 2:30-4:00 (Narrogin to Kondinin)

1 5 54.60 148.70 207.58


5 55 55.80 210.66 270.74


4 30 55.80 210.66 270.74


10 75 55.80* 210.66* 270.74


4 35 55.80* 210.66* 270.74


7 15 (No payment records for four passengers)

55.80* 210.66* 270.74


3 No payment record, estimated as 20

55.80* 210.66* 270.74

*For fuel expenditure and driver’s salary, three days (31/3/16, 14/4/16 and 12/5/16) of data were missed hence the expenditures have been estimated in accordance with previous records. ** Other expenditure is the cost for passenger step, which is evenly distributed to each trip.

120

ESTIMATE OF SERVICE COST FOR COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS Bus service cost includes operation cost per service, maintenance and repairs, as well as bus depreciation. Operation cost covers fuel, driver salary and other expenses recorded by the driver for each trip. Expenditures on maintenance and repairs account for the vehicle service, tyre replacement and general repairs, which are calculated by multiplying expenses per kilometre by trip distance. Bus depreciation is calculated on the basis of depreciation guidelines 166 for vehicles and the use of vehicle. The table below lists an approximately calculated total cost of Narrogin route. Route Trip

distance (Km)





Round trip between Kondinin and Narrogin

280 $270.74 $42 $8 $320.74

166 http://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2015/feb/tax-trends-01.html

Long distance bus service: round trip between Hyden and Narrogin is 530 km. For Kondinin to Narrogin round trip, the averaged bus driving distance is 280 kilometres.

The service usually departs in Kondinin at 8:30 and arrives in Narrogin at 10:00 while the return trip starts at 15:00 and ends at 16:30. The schedule varies within 30 minutes. From Hyden to Narrogin, the journey time is doubled.

The number of passengers is steady as same passengers regularly ride on bus. One exception appeared on 31st March, probably due to more medical appointments and social activities after Easter holidays.

On average, nearly three passengers ride on the bus from Kondinin and two get on the bus from Wickepin. No passengers get on and off at Kulin and Hyden. The average ticket revenue per round journey is about $40.

Operation costs include bus drivers’ salary, fuel and other expenditures (passenger step). From Hyde to Narrogin, the total expenditure is $383, while the total expenditure for Kondinin to Narrogin trip is $270.

Operation cost per round trip is much higher (at least six times) than the revenues collected from tickets.

121

APPENDIX K – ADVERTISING: JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP PILOT

122

APPENDIX L – JURIEN BAY TO JOONDALUP BUS SERVICE PETITION

A petition was signed by residents of the Shire of Dandaragan, however the signatories were not published for confidentiality reasons.

123

APPENDIX M – SHIRE OF DANDARAGAN AND SHIRE OF GINGIN QUALITATIVE DATA

Initially there were some timing issues surrounding pick-up and drop-off, however the only complaint during the pilot service was in regards to the side-seating bus that was trailed twice to offer passengers more space. Feedback for both Shires shows that whilst passengers did not actually buy a lot, besides coffee and lunch each trip, a lot of relationships were developed during the 22-week period. Examples are the three bus drivers (Chris, Chris’s sister and Marci) learning the passengers by name, passengers sharing their phone numbers to stay in contact, with some passengers collectively organising different activities each week to places such as the movies, Aldi and the Perth Mint which become possible due to the last pilot going to Perth CBD. The sense of community developed through the service is prevalent in the stories told about it, such as a grandparent who took their 13-year-old grandson on his birthday, where all the passengers put in $2 each to buy him a birthday cake (in the form of doughnuts) and sang him happy birthday. Another story explained two backpackers being picked-up of from Jurien Bay for a one-way trip to Perth, who happily payed the standard fair since the only Trans WA bus available was at 1am.

DEMAND AND VALUE DEMAND Over the 22-week pilot period, the Shire of Gingin payed $760 for the pilot service all up, selling 94 out of 132 ticket, whilst Dandaragan Shire averaged 4 passengers a week (≃88). With this in mind, passengers have expressed a willingness to pay more with f. That being said it was noted that passengers would still pay the same weekly cost as during the pilot survey, suggesting with higher prices that they would simply travel less. Trans WA offers another service costing $44 one-way ($22 for seniors), with a return trip for around $44 (seniors). The trial pilot service is preferred however since the Trans WA bus operates around 1am in the morning return and doesn’t offer the same service. Future demand has been noted with members of the public from Ledge Point expressing interest, hence there is a possibility to extend the range and stop of location of the pilot service. Cervantes primary school and Jurien senior high school have also expressed interest in using the private bus for excursions to Perth since their government school bus is not contracted to travel that far. This would mean if continued the purchasing of a bigger bus would be required and specific days would have to be allocated for seniors, schools and the public. It was also noted that if the pilot service was not subsidised in the future, then it would need to be opened up to the rest of the community in order to be viable. Additionally, Chris (bus driver) estimates if the pilot was unsubsidised it would be around $80 per passenger, which is not an affordable cost to be covered by senior passengers. Senior management in the Shire of Dandaragan illustrated as well that the numbers they saw were not as high as expected or as high as they need from a Shire economic perspective. Lastly weather made a difference in demand, with the rain in June, causing extra hassle, resulting in fewer passengers. VALUE The valued gained by passengers using the pilot service is apparent, with the majority of passengers benefiting due to the ability to access specialised health and medical services such as x-rays, optical, dental and blood test. The pilot service offers more than just a travel option; it offers passengers more freedom. This comes as the majority of senior passenger do not have cars nor a lot of confidence when driving, and hence the service not only relieves the stress associated with driving (e.g.

124

directions, road working, paying for parking), but allows passengers to have more fun, through the engagement in social activities such as shopping. This sense of increased independence, flexibility and freedom are perfectly capture in yet another story where through the service offered Sovereign Hill female passenger, Anne, the gained the ability to have time to herself and time away from caring for her husband who is an invalid. Time she notes as invaluable. Lastly the benefits and value of this service have had a permanent effect, with some passengers organising carpools, since the last pilot, for the same day and same time, since they are already missing the service, the people and as previously mentioned the increased freedom, flexibility and independence. OPERATIONS Initially a big determinate of the service uptake was advertising, which was focused towards aged user in the form of local newspapers and radio. This was the case since after pick-up and drop-off times changed. Some passengers would not look for that new information (which was provided by the Shires). Thus the operation relied on a small group of regulars, which could be attributed to the Shire calling up to check up on passengers and enquire if they would like to go each week. Throughout the 22-week period three different vehicles were trailed, an easier to manoeuver automatic Toyota commuter 14 seater, a similar commuter 14 seater with a different set-up (borrowed from a local business with additional upkeep fees, but was ideal after it was bought up to the level needed) and a 21 seater bus with side-facing seats was trailed twice but disliked as it added to motion sickness. The Passenger Services department was in charge of licensing and charged $42 per month to have the vehicle registered and licensed to carry that many passengers (14) for that distance. During the trailed service some tensions did arise as a result of the operations. Initial tensions came from Trans WA not wanting the pilot to proceed due to increased competition, especially since the service was being subsidised. Similarly, Cervantes supermarket showed “aggression” towards the pilot as they believed it could result in a loss of business, despite the service leaving at 7:20am, a time when the supermarket was still closed. Other tensions came from Woodridge Community Seniors Group who were not willing to coordinate their members to use to service. If the service were to continue on a route that already has an existing service, then approval may have to be gained through the Department of Transport. Additionally, arrangements with the Department of Transport and Trans Perth would need to be made to allow the service to park in the bus area of the Joondalup station instead of the two-hour parking car parl. Alternatively a special ticket or license could be arranged to omit the risk of any fines and reduce additional costs in the form of parking tickets.

125

APPENDIX N – ADVERTISING: WONGAN HILLS TO NORTHAM

126

APPENDIX O – INDIVIDUAL PROFILES FOR GROUP WITHOUT MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS

Passenger One: Wongan Hills Passenger One is over the age of 75 and mainly gets around the town by driving or walking without any mobility aid. She relies on herself for transport, and relies on her son to provide assistance when transport is unavailable. Passenger One is happy with her mobility and notes that there are no difficulties for her when it comes to accesses and participate in leisure and social activities.

Figure O1 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger One

Figure O2 Quality of life for Passenger One

Passenger Two: Wickepin Passenger Two is a senior female who despite access to a car usually gets around town by walking without any mobility aid or assistance. She performs on average, 3.5 hours of voluntary work per week, indicating that she easily gets access to social activities, medical services and retails. Passenger Two is able to participate in leisure and social activities as she wishes, suggesting mobility does not affect her life quality.

127

Figure O3 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Two

Figure O4 Quality of life for Passenger Two

Passenger Three: Kondinin Passenger Three is middle-aged male (under 50 years old), who walks to town without any mobility difficulties or assistance and easily has access to all services and social activities. However, due to a lack of car access, he visited the regional centre every 6 months and indicated that he would have liked to travel to the regional centre every 2 months, suggesting public transport is beneficial in meeting his travel needs. He undertook four out of seven trips on the Narrogin service and is always able to participate in social activities within the easy-access distance (we think).

128

Figure O5 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Three

Figure O6 Quality of life for Passenger Three

Passenger Four: Jurien Bay Passenger Four is a senior female (64-75 years old) who usually walks or cycles to town due to a lack of car accessibility. Passenger Four was not completely satisfied with the previous coach service as it did not provide the one-day round trip. However, with the current pilot service, she catches uses the bus service nearly every week and started to arrange the weekly social gathering with friends. Passenger Four also noted that it is easy for her to get access to medical services and social activities without assistance from others.

129

Figure O7 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Four

Figure O8 Quality of life for Passenger Four Passenger Five: Woodridge Passenger Five is a senior lady who usually walks around the town and drives to the regional area of Joondalup. She was satisfied with the current pilot bus service and suggested to keep this bus service. The respondent easily attends social activities without any support and assistance from others although she expressed “neutral” towards the difficulty to get access to medical service and retail outlets.

130

Figure O9 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Five

Figure O10 Quality of life for Passenger Five

Passenger Six: Woodridge Passenger Six is a senior aged female between the ages of 65 and 74. She usually drives the car to town and prior to the commencement of the pilot bus service, she never accessed services in Joondalup. However, she undertook the Joondalup bus service four times and is very satisfied with all aspects of bus service as well as her visit to Joondalup. It is easy for Passenger Six to access to social activities, medical appointments and grocery shopping without any assistance from friends or family members.

131

Figure O11 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Six

Figure O12 Quality of life for Passenger Six

Passenger Seven: Woodridge Passenger Seven is a senior, who undertook the bus service from Woodridge to Joondalup almost every Monday to enjoy the break from caring for her husband. Passenger Seven is able to drive to town as well as the regional centre of Joondalup without any mobility difficulties. However, she reported a slight difficulty in gaining access to medical service, shopping and social activities, which is probably due to her family obligations to look after her husband. She also commented that the pilot bus service is beneficial for her as it gives her one day per week to enjoy a personal social life.

132

Figure O13 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Seven

Figure O14 Quality of life for Passenger Seven

133

APPENDIX P – INDIVIDUAL PROFILES FOR GROUP WITH SLIGHT TO MODERATE MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS

Passenger Eight: Wickepin Passenger Eight is a senior female who works 6 hours per week as a volunteer. She went to the regional centre every week without any mobility aids and usually gets around by walking, despite having access to a car. Her data indicates that she has no difficulty in accessing activities and medical services, however requires assistance to get around and partly relies on family, friends or neighbours for travel.

Figure P1 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Eight

Figure P2 Quality of life for Passenger Eight

Passenger Nine: Calingiri Passenger Nine is a middle aged (50-64) female from Calingiri. She engages in a few voluntary hours of works per week and is able to get access to a car. She reported that she has difficulties in accessing medical services, retail outlets and social activities. Additionally, she partly relies on others for transport, as mobility prevents Elle participating in leisure activity, meetings and social gathering.

134

Figure P3 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Nine

Figure P4 Quality of life for Passenger Nine

Passenger Ten: Kondinin Passenger Ten is the senior who averaged two hours of voluntary work each week. She has access to a car and drives to the town. Prior to the bus service, she relied on her husband to travel to Narrogin and comments on the expensive fuel costs. She travels to the regional centre once every month but has to reschedule appointments, likely due to her reliance on her husband for transport. Passenger Ten mentioned the difficulty when grocery shopping and accessing medical services. However, mobility does not affect her life quality and she is always able to be involved in social gathering.

135

Figure P5 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Ten

Figure P6 Quality of life for Passenger Ten

Passenger Eleven: Calingiri Passenger Eleven is a senior male who drives to the regional centre six times per year and occasionally needs a mobility aid. He did not report his perception of mobility but indicated that mobility partly prevents him from participating in a hobby or leisure activity. He also relies on the of help friends or neighbours rather than immediate and extended family, with mobility related issues.

Figure P7 Quality of life for Passenger Eleven

136

APPENDIX Q – INDIVIDUAL PROFILES FOR GROUP WITH MODERATE TO HIGH MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS

Passenger Twelve: Kondinin Passenger Twelve is below the age of 50 and whilst able to walk around town, does not have access to a car. She relies on assistance to access medical services, shopping and social activities due to her lack of mobility (we think). However, her mobility does not prevent her from participating in social activities, as she undertook four out of seven trips on the Narrogin service

Figure Q1 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Twelve

Figure Q2 Quality of life for Passenger Twelve

137

Passenger Thirteen: Kondinin Passenger Thirteen is a senior, who has access to a car and is able to drive. However, she reported that she found some difficulty in accessing medical service and social activities, and indicated that she required the assistance of family members to travel to Narrogin. She travelled five or six times a year and noted that she would have travel more often if she had a medical issue. Passenger Thirteen has undertaken four trips since the service commenced (which would be an average of 13 trips per year), indicating that the lack of a bus service was limiting her options.

Figure Q3 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Thirteen

Figure Q4 Quality of life for Passenger Thirteen

Passenger Fourteen: Kondinin Passenger Fourteen is a senior from Kondinin that usually walks to the town with the aid of a walking stick. She relies on family members to travel to Narrogin and describes the prior transport arrangement as an infrequent and expensive service. Passenger Fourteen occasionally has to cancel appointments due to her strong reliability on others for transport. It is easy for her to get access to medical service with the family members’ assistance, while she indicated the difficulty to access to retail outlets, probably due to her own mobility constraints.

138

Figure Q5 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Fourteen

Figure Q6 Quality of life for Passenger Fourteen

Passenger Fifteen: Jurien Bay Passenger Fifteen is a senior-aged female residing in Jurien Bay, whom before pilot bus services, never engaged in services to Joondalup. She reported her satisfaction with previous transport arrangement as “unable to go”, while current service enable Joyce to easily access to health services and be highly involved in social gatherings. She has difficulty to access retail outlets and needs others’ help and assistance.

139

Figure Q7 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Fifteen

Figure Q8 Quality of life for Passenger Fifteen

Passenger Sixteen: Woodridge

Passenger Sixteen is a senior (50-64 years old) who undertakes 3 to 5 hours of voluntary work per week and usually gets around the town by walking. Due to no access to a car, prior to the pilot bus service, she heavily relied on family members or friends’ driving, to access services in Joondalup and noted the travel arrangements as an inconvenience. Current bus service enables Passenger Sixteen to socialise with friends and easily attend medical appointments.

140

Figure Q9 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Sixteen

Figure R10 Quality of life for Passenger Sixteen

Passenger Seventeen: Woodridge

Passenger Seventeen is a senior aged between 75 to 84 years old, who undertook the current pilot Joondalup service each week to meet friends. She has access to a car but indicated mobility difficulty limits her access to medical services and social activities. Passenger Seventeen relies on family and neighbours’ assistance for transport needs.

Figure Q11 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Seventeen

141

Figure Q12 Quality of life for Passenger Seventeen in terms of participating social activities

Passenger Eighteen: Sovereign Hill

Passenger Eighteen is a senior female, who undertook the Joondalup service since it commenced. Although she is able to drive and get around the town, she relied on friend’s help when attending appointments in Joondalup prior to the bus service being available. Passenger Eighteen indicated difficulty in accessing medical services, retail outlets and social activities. She is satisfied with current pilot bus service, especially as it facilitates her need to visit eye and pathology specialists.

Figure Q13 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Eighteen

Figure Q14 Quality of life for Passenger Eighteen

142

APPENDIX R – LATE INDIVIDUAL PROFILES

Passenger Nineteen: NA

Passenger Nineteen is a senior female who took the pilot bus service to Joondalup. She reported no mobility difficulty in accessing medical services, social activities or shopping. Passenger Nineteen is satisfied with the bus service but is concerned about its’ low frequency.

Figure R1 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Nineteen

Figure R2 Quality of life for Passenger Nineteen

Passenger Twenty: Cervantes

Passenger Twenty is a senior female aged between 65 and 74. She used to travel to Midland and indicates the pilot bus to Joondalup is beneficial as it allows her to attend here Joondalup dentist service. Passenger Twenty is the volunteer for collating Pinnacle paper and wrote a story about the bus trip as a way to introduce the service to the community. She has no mobility difficulty and does not rely on others assistance to access to medical services and social activities.

143

Figure R3 Perceptions of mobility for Passenger Twenty

Figure R4 Quality of life for Passenger Twenty

144

APPENDIX S – KEY RECOMMENDATIONS TO GOVERNMENT

The WDC has used the running costs associated with the Jurien Bay pilot during the subsidy calculation process, as this pilot took into account all costs of operating a service as it was run by a commercial operator. In some of the Local Government pilots, buses and other costs were contributed and absorbed by the participating Local Governments. The WDC averaged the Transwa fare structure over a large number of their services and used these to come up with a competitive subsidy per km model to run up to 6 different weekly or fortnightly services throughout the Region. This scenario was tested using a realistic and respectable passenger number of six per round trip (four Transwa concession fare holders paying $0.10 per Km, and two Transwa standard fare holders paying $0.19 per Km); six passengers is representative of the average number of passengers the bus service experienced during the pilot programs, with the incorporation of standard fare holders. Six passengers (standard and concession) is also representative of the average number of passengers needed to ensure a breakeven point (Marginal Rate of Substitution) for the services to achieve economic viability. The results in the table below are based on the following assumptions:

The average Transwa Concession and Standard per Km fares are correct ($0.10 and $0.19 per Km, respectively);

The breakdown of cost of service is accurate for small buses of the size used in these pilots ($2.06 per Km);

The profit of the service will equal $0.28 per Km (should there be 6 people on each service and Transwa fares are charged);

The buses used are 12 - 20-seaters; The Km for current WDC pilots equates to 1,004Km; The Km for current Transwa funded feeder services equates to 454Km; The total Km for current pilots and additional Transwa funded services equates to 1,458Km; The amount of admin fees for a year would be approximately $50,000.

145

*Costs for all six services are based on the Jurien Bay to Joondalup cost breakdown which used a $2.06 per km cost rate and a $0.28 per km profit rate **Concession and standard fares per trip used in this calculation assumes an average of 6 passengers (4 concession at a Transwa rate of $0.10 per km and 2 standard at a Transwa rate of $0.19 per km)

Serv

ice

Appr

oxim

ate

km ro

und

trip

Serv

ice

cost

* pe

r Rou

nd

trip

Conc

essio

n Fa

re (C

F) p

er tr

ip**

Stan

dard

Far

e (S

F) p

er

trip

**

Stat

e Go

vt su

bsid

y pe

r ro

und

trip

Stat

e Go

vt su

bsid

y pe

r ye

ar to

run

serv

ice

wee

kly

Stat

e Go

vt su

bsid

y pe

r ye

ar to

run

serv

ice

fort

nigh

tly

If State Govt subsidy was $0 per km

If State Govt subsidy was $1.50 per km

If State Govt subsidy was $1.56 per km

Cost

cov

ered

by

Stat

e Go

vt

Cost covered by LGA per round trip

Cost

cov

ered

by

Stat

e Go

vt


Cost

cov

ered

by

Stat

e Go

vt


Rem

aini

ng

Cost

s (RC

)

RC &

ha

lvin

g CF

RC &

ha

lvin

g CF

&

SF

Rem

aini

ng

Cost

s (RC

)

RC &

ha

lvin

g CF

RC &

ha

lvin

g CF

&

SF

Rem

aini

ng

Cost

s (RC

)

RC &

ha

lvin

g CF

RC &

ha

lvin

g CF

&

SF

Hyden to Narrogin 384 898.5 153.6 145.9 599 31,148 15,574 0.0 599 675.8 748.7 576.0 23.0 99.8 172.8 599.0 0.0 76.8 149.8

Wongan-Ballidu to Northam

192 449.3 76.8 72.9 299.6 15,579 7,790 0.0 299.6 338 374.5 288.0 11.6 50 86.5 299.6 0.0 38.4 74.9

Jurien Bay to Joondalup 428 1,001.

5 171.2 162.6 667.7 34,720 17,360 0.0 667.7 753.3 834.6 642.0 25.7 111.3 192.6 667.7 0.0 85.6 166.9

Koorda to Goomalling Feeder

200 468 80 76 312 16,224 8,112 0.0 312 352 390 300.0 12.0 52.0 90 312 0.0 40 78

Goomalling to Toodyay Feeder

102 238.6 40.8 38.7 159.1 8,273 4,137 0.0 159.1 179.5 198.9 153.0 6.1 26.5 45.9 159.1 0.0 20.4 39.8

Mukinbudin to Merredin Feeder

152 355.6 60.8 57.7 237.1 12,329 6,165 0.0 237.1 267.5 296.4 228.0 9.1 39.5 68.4 237.1 0.0 30.4 59.3

Total 1,458 3,411.5 583.2 553.8 2,274.

5 118,273 59,138 0.0 2,274.5

2,566.1 2,843.1 2,187 87.5 379.1 656.2 2,274.

5 0.0 291.6 568.7

LOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT

Documents

Transcript of LOCAL TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS PROJECT