Laserfiche WebLink
TO: Names E. Chandler <br />County Administrator <br />DIV ON HEAD CONCURRENCE <br />i' <br />Robert M. eatin <br />Community Develo ent /rJector <br />FROM: Sasan Rohani, AICP S'/(• <br />Chief, Long -Range Planning <br />DATE: July 29, 1996 <br />RE: REQUEST TO APPROVE COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR <br />(CTC) ANNUAL EVALUATION REPORT FOR 1995-96 <br />It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal <br />consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular <br />meeting of August 13, 1996. <br />DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS <br />One requirement of the county's coordinated transportation <br />disadvantaged development plan is that "the Transportation <br />Disadvantaged Local Coordinating Board (TDLCB) shall evaluate the <br />performance of the Community Transportation Coordinator and provide <br />a recommendation to the DOPA for continuation or replacement of the <br />Community Transportation Coordinator". To facilitate this <br />evaluation process, the TDLCB developed a set of criteria for the <br />coordinator evaluation. On September 11, 1992, the Board of County <br />Commissioners, acting as the county's Designated Official Planning <br />Agency (DOPA), approved the CTC's evaluation procedures and <br />standards. <br />To conduct the CTC evaluation, the Transportation Disadvantaged <br />Local Coordinating Board (TDLCB) established a subcommittee, whose <br />purpose was to meet with the coordinator and evaluate the <br />coordinator's performance. Using the criteria established by the <br />TDLCB, as well as evaluation criteria established by the State <br />Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged (CTD), the <br />subcommittee assessed the performance of the Community <br />Transportation Coordinator and prepared a report addressing the <br />coordinator's performance in relation to each of the evaluation <br />criteria. A copy of that report is attached. Based upon its <br />assessment, the evaluation sub -committee recommended that the <br />Indian River County Council on Aging be retained as the county's <br />CTC. <br />At its regular meeting on July 18, 1996, the TDLCB approved the CTC <br />annual evaluation report submitted by the evaluation subcommittee. <br />The TDLCB also -directed staff to forward the evaluation report to <br />the Board of County Commissioners/DOPA for review and approval. <br />Alternatives and Analysis <br />The Indian River County Council on Aging has been the County's <br />Community Transportation Coordinator (CTC) since October.1990. In <br />each of the past five years, the Transportation Disadvantaged Local <br />Coordinating Board (TDLCB) recommended that the BCC/DOPA retain the <br />Council on Aging as the county's CTC. Subsequently, the BCC/DOPA <br />approved the TDLCB's recommendation and retained the Indian River <br />County Council on Aging as the coordinator. <br />This year, evaluation of the CTC was performed by an evaluation <br />subcommittee of the Local Coordinating Board. This evaluation was, <br />conducted according to the CTC evaluation procedures and criteria <br />approved by the TDLCB and the BCC/DOPA and the CTD's evaluation <br />criteria. Based upon the evaluation committee's report, the <br />Transportation Disadvantaged Local Coordinating Board voted to <br />retain the Council on Aging as the county's CTC. <br />The Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Transportation <br />Disadvantaged Designated Official Planning Agency (DOPA), has <br />several alternatives. The first alternative is to approve the CTC <br />annual evaluation report and retain the Council on Aging as the <br />County's CTC. A second alternative would be to reject the CTC <br />annual evaluation report and direct the TDLCB to re-evaluate the <br />coordinator. A third alternative would be to make changes to the <br />evaluation report and vote either to retain or terminate the <br />Council on Aging as the county's CTC. <br />�oDx <br />AUGUST 13, 1996 9 ''r <br />