Given many public services previously delivered by federal and state entities continue to devolve to more local levels of service delivery and programmatic control, interorganizational coordination serves as an approach for the public sector to ensure that services are efficiently delivered in a nonduplicative manner. This article explores the issue of coordination by examining three different policy approaches toward local coordination of transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged. Local transportation services for the disadvantaged are often delivered by a variety of nonprofit organizations, operated independently by multiple entities in a community, and result in duplicative, overlapping, and uncoordinated services. The analysis concludes that although coordination sounds like an easy and magical policy solution to be effective, state-level policies must, at a minimum, target and fund the coordination process. Differing examples of how this goal is to be reached, along with an exploration of state-level and local-level activities, are presented.
Aldrich, H. (1976). Resource dependence and interorganizational relations: Relations between local employment service offices and social services sector organizations. Administrative Sociology, 7, 419-454.
2.
Alexander, E. R. (1993). Interorganizational coordination: Theory and practice. Journal of Planning Literature, 7(4), 328-343.
3.
Anderson, J. (1998). Welfare reform: Transportation’s role in moving from welfare to work. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office.
4.
Arsenault, J. , & National Alliance for Nonprofit Management. (1998). Forging nonprofit alliances: A comprehensive guide to enhancing your mission through joint ventures and partnerships, management service organizations, parent corporations, mergers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
Bardach, E. (1998). Getting agencies to work together: The practice and theory of managerial craftsmanship. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
6.
Blumenberg, E. (2000). Planning for the transportation needs of welfare recipients: Institutional challenges to collaborative planning. Atlanta, GA: Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning.
7.
Bush, G. W. (2001). Rallying the armies of compassion. Washington, DC: The White House.
8.
Community Transportation Assistance Project . (1996). Pooling community resources makes accessible transit affordable. Community Solutions, 2(Fall). Retrieved January 15, 2000, from www.ctaa.org/ntrc/ctap/pubs/commsol2.asp
9.
Community Transportation Assistance Project . (1997). The link to employment: Case managers as mobility managers. Community Solutions, 3(Winter), pp.1–7. Retrieved January 15, 2000, from www.ctaa.org/ntrc/ctap/pubs/commsol2.asp
10.
Community Transportation Association of America . (1998). Access to jobs: A guide to innovative practices in welfare-to-work transportation. Washington, DC: Author.
11.
Connor, J. A. , & Kadel-Taras, S. (2000a). The community support organization: Linking not-for-profits to community impact. Not-for-Profit CEO Monthly Letter. Retrieved December 21, 2001, from http://comnet.org/collaboratorycs/paper4.html
12.
Connor, J. A. , & Kadel-Taras, S. (2000b). Organizing community work to reach solutions. PNN Online. Retrieved December 18, 2001, from www.pnnonline.org
13.
County Transportation System Management . (1995). Community transportation requirements and resources questionnaire. Ann Arbor, MI: Author.
14.
Danziger, S. , Corcoran, M., Danziger, S., Heflin, C., Kalil, A., Levine, J., et al. (2000). Barriers to the employment of welfare recipients. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Poverty Research and Training Center.
15.
Denmark, D. (1998). The outsiders: Planning and transport disadvantage. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17(3), 231-245.
16.
Dluhy, M. J. , & Kravitz, S. L. (1990). Building coalitions in the human services. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
17.
Florida . (2000). Statutes. Social Welfare, Chapter 427: Special Transportation and Communications Services, Section 427.011(1).
18.
Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged. (1998). Retrieved August 8, 2000, from www.dot.state.fl.us/ctd
19.
Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged . (2000). 1999 annual performance report. Tallahassee, FL: Author.
20.
Ginsler, E. (1998). Working together: Maximizing the impact of community services. Kitchner, Ontario, Canada: Ginsler & Associates.
21.
Graham, J. R. , & Barter, K. (1999). Collaboration: A social work practice method. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 80(1), 6-13.
22.
Gray, B. (1985). Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration. Human Relations, 38(10), 911-936.
23.
Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24.
Holzer, H. J. (1991). The spatial mismatch hypothesis: What has the evidence shown?Urban Studies, 28(1), 105-122.
25.
Hutchinson, J. A. (1997, November). Barriers sharpen our focus on the customer. Community Transportation. Retrieved February 10, 2000, from www.ctaa.org/ct/nov97/florida.asp
26.
Innes, J. E. ,& Booher, D. E. (1999). Consensus building as role-playing and bricolage: Toward a theory of collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 65(1), 9-26.
27.
Kain, J. (1968). Housing segregation, Negro employment, and metropolitan decentralisation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 82, 175-197.
28.
KFH Group . (2000). Transportation development plan. Bethesda, OH: Ottawa County and the Ohio Department of Transportation.
29.
Lacombe, A. (1998). Welfare reform and access to jobs in Boston. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics.
30.
Margerum, R. D. (2002). Collaborative planning: Building consensus and building a distinct model for practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21, 237-253.
31.
Mattessich, P. W. , & Monsey, B. R. (1992). Collaboration: What makes it work. Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
32.
McCray, T. (2000). Delivering healthy babies: Transportation and health care access. Planning Practice and Research, 15(1/2), 17-29.
33.
Metropolitan Affairs Coalition . (1997). Reducing the transportation barrier for the welfare dependent: Lessons learned in greater Detroit. Detroit, MI: Author.
34.
National Governor’s Association . (1995). Human services transportation: What is it and why is it important?Washington, DC: Author.
35.
Ohio Department of Transportation . (1999). Ohio works first. Retrieved September 12, 2000 from www.dot.state.oh.us/ptrans/Coordination%20Links/owf.htm.
36.
Ohio Department of Transportation . (2000a). ODOT coordination activities. Retrieved September 19, 2000, from www.dot.state.oh.us/ptrans/downloads/Coordination_Links/coord_activities.htm
37.
Ohio Department of Transportation . (2000b). Ohio coordination program criteria and application instructions for calendar year 2001. Columbus, OH: Author.
38.
Ohio Department of Transportation . (2000c). Transportation coordination overview. Retrieved July 25, 2000, from www.dot.state.oh.us/ptrans/Funding_Programs/Coord_Prog/trans_coord.htm
39.
Ohio Department of Transportation, RLS & Associates, CGA Consulting Services . (1997a). A guide for implementing coordinated transportation systems. Columbus: Ohio Department of Transportation.
40.
Ohio Department of Transportation, RLS & Associates, CGA Consulting Services . (1997b). A handbook for coordinating transportation services. Columbus: Ohio Department of Transportation.
41.
Pitt, J. (1998). Community-based collaboratives: A study of interorganizational cooperation at the neighborhood level (Nonprofit Sector Research Fund Working Paper Series). Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
42.
Rosenbloom, S. (1992). The transportation disadvantaged. In G. E. Gray & L. A. Hoel (Eds.), Public transportation (pp. 583-615). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
43.
Straight, A. (1997). Community transportation survey. Washington, DC: American Association of Retired Persons.
44.
Thacher, D. (1998). Developing community partnerships: Value conflicts in eleven cities (Working paper #98-05-15). Boston: Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management of the Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy.
45.
Tri-County Community Council . (n.d.). Tri-County Community Council, Inc. - “Helping People Help Themselves” (Organizational Brochure). DeFuniak Springs, FL: Author.
46.
U.S. Department of Transportation . (n.d.). Keys to success, Department of Transportation/Federal Transit Administration Welfare to Work Initiative. Washington, DC: Federal Transit Administration. Retrieved November 25, 1998, from www.fta.dot.gov/wtw/access-to-jobs-brochure.htm
47.
U.S. Government Accounting Office . (1999). Transportation coordination: Benefits and barriers exist, and planning efforts progress slowly. Washington, DC: Author.
48.
University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute . (1997). Application of decision analysis to intelligent transportation system societal issues. Ann Arbor, MI: Research Information and Publication Center.
49.
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center . (1998). The transportation system’s role in moving welfare recipients to jobs. Volpe Center Journal, (Spring). Retrieved from www.volpe.dot.gov/infosrc/journal/spring98/jobs.html.
50.
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Research and Special Programs Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation . (2000). Current state and local practices in planning for coordinated transportation(Draft). Prepared for the Office of Planning, Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC.
51.
Wallis, A. (1994). The challenge of coordination in human service networks. Queenstown, MD: Aspen Institute.
52.
Weiss, J. A. (1981). Substance vs. symbol in administrative reform: The case of human services coordination. Policy Analysis, 7(1/2), 21-45.
53.
Winer, M. B. ,& Ray, K. L. (1994). Collaboration handbook: Creating, sustaining, and enjoying the journey. Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
