TRansit ACessibility Tool (TRACT) Methods

Potential public transit users often rely on public transit websites to find transit routes, time tables, accessibility information, paratransit eligibility information, and accommodation options. The Public Transit Dashboard ranks the accessibility and accommodation information located on public transit websites. The public transit Scores page and Source Links page include additional information.

Public transit webpage information was collected among 26 public transit systems receiving the most federal funding in the United States, from February through March of 2022. These public transit systems were identified using the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) National Transit Database and account for 66% of the total federal funds allocated to all public transit systems in the 2020 fiscal year. The public transit webpage was identified through a web search of the public transit agency name.

Based on key principles of universal design and accessibility, scoring included six areas:

  • Public transit facility accessibility (22 points maximum): Scores were determined by the total number of facility accessibility features (e.g., elevators, hearing loops) listed on the public transit website. One point was assigned for each accessibility feature, points were averaged across all available modes (e.g., bus, heavy rail), and averages were summed to create a facility accessibility score.
  • Public transit vehicle accessibility (11 points maximum): Scores were determined by the total number of vehicle accessibility features (e.g., audio announcements, securement devices) listed on the public transit website. One point was assigned for each accessibility feature, points were averaged across all available modes (e.g., bus, heavy rail), and averages were summed to create a vehicle accessibility score.
  • Inclusive policies of public transit systems (12 points maximum): Scores were determined based on the public transit system’s solicitation of feedback from the public and number of modalities available for submitting feedback. One point was assigned for each accessibility feature (e.g., listing ADA coordinator, public participation opportunities) and then summed to create an inclusive policies score.
  • Public transit rider accommodations (9 points maximum: Scores were determined based on the public transit system accommodation request system (e.g., modes to submit an accommodation, updates if the system was in working order). One point was assigned for each accessibility feature and then summed to create a rider accommodations score.
  • Public transit paratransit services (6 points maximum): Scores were determined based on paratransit service information listed on the public transit website. Points were assigned for eligibility criteria, hours of operation, and ride reservations and then summed to create a paratransit services score.
  • Virtual accessibility of public transit websites (2 points maximum): Scores were determined based on an automated accessibility assessment score and a high-level manual accessibility assessment score of public transit website. These data were normalized to the WebAIM Million sample of one million homepages and categorized into tertiles to create a virtual accessibility score. The lowest tertile (values at or below 3.3) received 0 points, the middle tertile (values above 3.3 and at or below 6.7) received 1 point, and the highest tertile (values above 6.7) received 2 points.

The total public transit score was calculated as the sum of the sub-scores across all six areas outlined above. A total of 62 points was possible. Higher scores indicate more accessible public transit websites and more disability-inclusive public transit information and processes.

Table 2. Facility Accessibility of Public Transit System Websites Scores, 2022

wdt_ID Public Transit System Facility Score Rank Facility Score (22 pts max) Accessible Parking Accessible Restrooms Information Available in Alternative Formats Detectable Warnings Elevator Escalator Staff Training on Inclusion Wide Fare Gates Hearing Assistance Systems Hearing Loops Illumination of Surfaces Level Boarding Ramp Slip-Resistant Surfaces Audio Announcements Visual Information Tickets Available via Kiosk Tickets Available Online Tickets Available In-Person Travel Training Program Wayfinding Signs Facility Information Updated Regularly
1 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 1 17 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1
2 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 2 13 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority 3 13 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 4 11 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 5 10 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MUNI) 5 10 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
7 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 7 10 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1
8 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 7 10 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1
9 New York MTA 9 9 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
10 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 10 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
11 Chicago Transit Authority 11 9 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
12 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 11 9 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
13 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 11 9 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
14 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon 11 9 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
15 New Jersey Transit Corporation 15 8 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1
16 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 15 8 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
17 Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation 17 8 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
18 Denver Regional Transportation District 18 7 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1
19 The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 18 7 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1
20 Utah Transit Authority 20 7 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
21 Maryland Transit Administration 21 6 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
22 Minneapolis Minnesota Metro Transit 22 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0
23 King County Department of Metro Transit 23 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
24 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 24 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1
25 Transportation & Public Work of Miami-Dade 25 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
Public Transit System Facility Score Rank Facility Score (22 pts max) Accessible Parking Accessible Restrooms Information Available in Alternative Formats Detectable Warnings Elevator Escalator Staff Training on Inclusion Wide Fare Gates Hearing Assistance Systems Hearing Loops Illumination of Surfaces Level Boarding Ramp Slip-Resistant Surfaces Audio Announcements Visual Information Tickets Available via Kiosk Tickets Available Online Tickets Available In-Person Travel Training Program Wayfinding Signs Facility Information Updated Regularly

Table 3. Vehicle Accessibility of Public Transit System Websites Scores, 2022

wdt_ID Public Transit System Vehicle Score Rank Vehicle Score (11 pts max) Detectable Warnings External Information Gap Reducers Lower Body Entrance Lift On-board Audio Announcements On-board Visual Information Ramp Securement Devices Variation in Stop Request Signal Which Vehicles Have Accessible Features
1 Chicago Transit Authority 1 8 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MUNI) 2 8 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2 8 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 4 7 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
5 New Jersey Transit Corporation 5 7 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1
6 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 6 7 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
7 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon 7 6 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0
8 Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority 8 6 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1
9 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 9 6 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
10 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 10 6 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0
11 Utah Transit Authority 11 6 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
12 Denver Regional Transportation District 12 5 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
13 New York MTA 13 5 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
14 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 13 5 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1
15 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 15 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1
16 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 16 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1
17 Maryland Transit Administration 17 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
18 Minneapolis Minnesota Metro Transit 17 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0
19 Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
20 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
21 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 21 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
22 King County Department of Metro Transit 22 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation 23 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
24 The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 23 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
25 Transportation & Public Work of Miami-Dade 25 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Public Transit System Vehicle Score Rank Vehicle Score (11 pts max) Detectable Warnings External Information Gap Reducers Lower Body Entrance Lift On-board Audio Announcements On-board Visual Information Ramp Securement Devices Variation in Stop Request Signal Which Vehicles Have Accessible Features

Table 4. Inclusive Policies of Public Transit System Websites Scores, 2022

wdt_ID Public Transit System Policy Score Rank Policy Score (12 pts max) Accessibility Policy Described ADA Coordinator Listed Public Participation Complaint's Solicited Designated Employee to Resolve Complaints Email Complaint Submission In Person Complaint Submission Mail Complaint Submission Other Method Complaint Submission Telephone Complaint Submission Web-based Form Complaint Submission TTY Available for Complaint Submission
1 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MUNI) 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1
2 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 2 10 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2 10 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 Utah Transit Authority 2 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0
5 Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority 2 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1
6 The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 6 9 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
7 Maryland Transit Administration 6 9 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1
8 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 8 8 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0
9 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 8 8 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1
10 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0
11 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0
12 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 8 8 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
13 Chicago Transit Authority 8 8 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1
14 King County Department of Metro Transit 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0
15 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 8 8 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1
16 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 8 8 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1
17 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 17 7 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0
18 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon 17 7 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
19 Minneapolis Minnesota Metro Transit 17 7 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1
20 New Jersey Transit Corporation 17 7 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1
21 Denver Regional Transportation District 21 6 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
22 Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas 21 6 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
23 Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation 21 6 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
24 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 21 6 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
25 New York MTA 25 5 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0
Public Transit System Policy Score Rank Policy Score (12 pts max) Accessibility Policy Described ADA Coordinator Listed Public Participation Complaint's Solicited Designated Employee to Resolve Complaints Email Complaint Submission In Person Complaint Submission Mail Complaint Submission Other Method Complaint Submission Telephone Complaint Submission Web-based Form Complaint Submission TTY Available for Complaint Submission

Table 5. Rider Accommodations of Public Transit System Websites Scores, 2022

wdt_ID Public Transit System Accommodations Score Rank Accommodations Score (9 pts max) Accomodation Request's Solicited Email Accommodation Request In Person Accommodation Request Mail Accommodation Request Other Method Accommodation Request Telephone Accommodation Request Web-based Form Accommodation Request TTY Available for Accommodation Request Vehicle Information Updated Regularly
1 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 1 8 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 2 7 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
3 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 2 7 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1
4 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 2 7 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1
5 Utah Transit Authority 2 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
6 Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority 6 7 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
7 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 7 6 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1
8 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 7 6 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
9 Chicago Transit Authority 7 6 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
10 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 10 6 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
11 King County Department of Metro Transit 11 5 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0
12 New Jersey Transit Corporation 11 5 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1
13 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 11 5 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1
14 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 11 5 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
15 The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 11 5 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1
16 New York MTA 16 5 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
17 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 17 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0
18 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 18 4 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
19 Minneapolis Minnesota Metro Transit 18 4 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
20 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon 18 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
21 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MUNI) 21 4 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
22 Denver Regional Transportation District 21 4 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
23 Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas 23 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
24 Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation 23 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
25 Maryland Transit Administration 23 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
Public Transit System Accommodations Score Rank Accommodations Score (9 pts max) Accomodation Request's Solicited Email Accommodation Request In Person Accommodation Request Mail Accommodation Request Other Method Accommodation Request Telephone Accommodation Request Web-based Form Accommodation Request TTY Available for Accommodation Request Vehicle Information Updated Regularly

Table 6. Paratransit Services of Public Transit System Websites Scores, 2022

wdt_ID Public Transit System Paratransit Score Rank Paratransit Score (6 pts max) Paratransit Details Described Eligibility Criteria Clearly Defined Paratransit Hours of Operation Paratransit Reservations
1 Chicago Transit Authority 1 6 1 1 2 2
2 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 1 6 1 1 2 2
3 New York MTA 1 6 1 1 2 2
4 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 1 6 1 1 2 2
5 Minneapolis Minnesota Metro Transit 1 6 1 1 2 2
6 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 1 6 1 1 2 2
7 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 1 6 1 1 2 2
8 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon 1 6 1 1 2 2
9 Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas 1 6 1 1 2 2
10 Denver Regional Transportation District 1 6 1 1 2 2
11 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MUNI) 1 6 1 1 2 2
12 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 12 5 1 1 1 2
13 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 12 5 1 1 1 2
14 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 12 5 1 1 1 2
15 Utah Transit Authority 12 5 1 1 1 2
16 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 12 5 1 1 1 2
17 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 12 5 1 0 2 2
18 King County Department of Metro Transit 18 4 1 0 1 2
19 Maryland Transit Administration 18 4 1 0 1 2
20 The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 18 4 1 1 1 1
21 Transportation & Public Work of Miami-Dade 21 3 1 1 1 0
22 Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority 21 3 1 1 1 0
23 New Jersey Transit Corporation 23 2 1 0 1 0
24 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 24 0 0 0 0 0
25 Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation 24 0 0 0 0 0
Public Transit System Paratransit Score Rank Paratransit Score (6 pts max) Paratransit Details Described Eligibility Criteria Clearly Defined Paratransit Hours of Operation Paratransit Reservations

Table 7. Virtual Accessibility of Public Transit System Websites Scores, 2022

wdt_ID Public Transit System Virtual Score Rank Virtual Score (2 pts max) Public Transit Website Accessibility Value Automated Accessibility Score Manual Accessibility Score
1 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 1 2 9 10 9
2 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2 2 9 10 9
3 Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority 3 2 9 9 9
4 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 4 2 9 8 10
5 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 5 2 9 10 8
6 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MUNI) 6 2 9 9 8
7 New Jersey Transit Corporation 7 2 9 8 9
8 New York MTA 8 2 9 9 8
9 Denver Regional Transportation District 9 2 9 9 8
10 Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon 10 2 8 8 8
11 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 11 2 8 8 8
12 Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation 12 2 8 8 9
13 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 13 2 8 8 8
14 Transportation & Public Work of Miami-Dade 13 2 8 8 8
15 Maryland Transit Administration 15 2 8 8 7
16 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 16 2 7 7 8
17 Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas 17 2 7 8 7
18 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 18 2 7 8 6
19 King County Department of Metro Transit 19 2 7 6 8
20 Chicago Transit Authority 20 2 7 6 7
21 Minneapolis Minnesota Metro Transit 21 1 7 5 8
22 Dallas Area Rapid Transit 22 1 6 8 5
23 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority 23 1 6 7 6
24 Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 24 1 6 7 6
25 The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 25 1 6 6 7
Public Transit System Virtual Score Rank Virtual Score (2 pts max) Public Transit Website Accessibility Value Automated Accessibility Score Manual Accessibility Score

Limitations:

These scores are limited to data collected from public transit webpages, as this is the information available to potential users, but there may be additional barriers found throughout a user’s journey on a transit system. Information provided on public transit websites does not represent the true experience of people using the system. Although the website information does not represent the lived experience, websites are a primary source of information about public transit systems and therefore important for information access. This project was limited in scope, evaluating 26 public transit agencies in the United States. Additional data is still needed to provide the full picture of disability inclusion and accessibility on board public transit systems. Lastly, public transit webpages may change over time. URLs that were scored and ranked previously may no longer be included in the current ranking if the website URL has been changed.

Associated Peer Reviewed Methods Paper

Forthcoming

Citation

Citation for this data, figures, or graphs from this dashboard: The Johns Hopkins Disability Health Research Center Public Transit Dashboard. https://disabilityhealth.jhu.edu

Contact Information

If you have questions or need the data in an alternate accessible format, you can contact us at disabilityhealth@jhu.edu.