HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESPONSE - RFP - 8061 TRANSIT PASSENGER SURVEYSCITY OF FORT COLLINS
TRANSIT PASSENGER SURVEYS
RFP NO. 8061
PROPOSAL
FEBRUARY 23, 2015
February 23, 2015
Mr. Timothy Wilder
Project Manager
City of Fort Collins Purchasing Division
215 North Mason St., 2nd Floor
Fort Collins, CL 80524
Re: Proposal No. 8061, Transit Passenger Surveys
Dear Mr. Wilder,
Enclosed is Moore & Associates’ proposal to conduct an onboard survey of passengers onboard the City’s Transfort
service as well as additional market research activities. Given our focus on public transit market research, this
represents an exciting opportunity for our firm.
Quality market research provides the foundation for effective service planning decisions, customer retention, and
ridership growth. The proposed triennial system-wide onboard survey will obtain statistically valid input from current
riders, including demographics, awareness and perception of the service, travel patterns, and satisfaction.
Employing our nearly 25 years of transit research and marketing experience, we will provide Fort Collins with the
customer data needed to make quality planning and marketing decisions in the years ahead.
Moore & Associates has assisted communities throughout California and the western United States in crafting
innovative and community-based public transit solutions since 1991. Implementation of service recommendations
resulting from our survey research and program evaluations has consistently resulted in quantifiable benefits such as
increased ridership, increased fare revenue, and growth in community support for our client’s programs or services.
We propose Jose Perez as Project Manager. As a transit planner, Jose understands transit operations, including
how data collected through various methodologies can be used to prepare service and marketing recommendations.
Joining Jose will be Chris Vandepas and Jim Moore. Chris brings extensive experience in survey administration,
including the training and management of quality surveyor teams. Jim Moore, our firm’s founder, will oversee the
project as Principal-in-Charge. His 30 years of experience in project management, service evaluation and planning,
and public transit surveying will guide our team to ensure quality data collection and analysis.
Enclosed is one digital copy of our proposal for review, followed by work samples. This proposal represents a firm
offer that remains in effect for 90 days following submission. As our firm’s Corporate Secretary, I am authorized to
negotiate and sign any legally binding contract on behalf of our firm. We acknowledge receipt of Addendum No. 1.
We look forward to the opportunity to discuss our proposed project approach, credentials, and experience with your
selection committee. Thank you for your consideration of Moore & Associates, Inc.
Sincerely,
Allison Moore
Corporate Secretary
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
2
Table of Contents
Section 1: Methods and Approach ..................................................................02
Section 2: Qualifications and Experience ......................................................06
Section 3: Project Personnel ...........................................................................08
Section 4: Organization Chart .........................................................................09
Section 5: Availability .......................................................................................09
Section 6: Schedule of Rates...........................................................................10
Section 7: Vendor Statement ...........................................................................10
Section 8: Work Samples .................................................................................11
Section 1: Methods and
Approach
Project Understanding
Transfort, the City of Fort Collins’ public transit
program, provides weekday and weekend fixed-route
services including a rapid transit route (MAX) and a
regional route between Fort Collins and Longmont
(FLEX) as well as paratransit services. Serving a
population of more than 150,000, the transit system
consists of over 40 vehicles operating out of three
primary transit centers, including at the Colorado State
University campus and downtown area. In order to
keep with Transfort’s mission of “providing exceptional,
customer-focused service that meets the community’s
present and future needs,” the City is seeking to
conduct a triennial system-wide onboard survey to
assess Transfort’s efforts toward meeting these
mission goals.
The system-wide onboard survey is the main focus of
this market research proposal as the previous survey
was conducted in 2008. However, other market
research efforts may potentially be included in this
contract. Market research activities conducted on a
regular or ongoing basis allow transit providers to
identify program strengths and weaknesses while
developing strategies for enhancing service, and thus
mobility, within the service area. Given the changes to
factors that influence ridership, such as gas prices,
employing market research to clearly identify strategies
for maximizing Transfort’s impact on community
mobility is particularly critical. Market research efforts
form the backbone of primary data collection efforts in
the service planning process. Sound planning
decisions are problematic absent the presence of a
solid foundation of quality, current data regarding travel
patterns, fare media, the profile customer, and demand
for public transit service.
Scope of Work for Onboard Surveys
Our approach to the Scope of Services describes the
process for the triennial onboard survey. Each task is
addressed herein. An individual work scope will be
developed for any additional survey task orders
included within this contract, at which time new tasks
may be discussed.
Task 1: Survey Planning
Upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed, our project
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
3
schedules, and finalize the project timeline. Our
project team will then submit a draft survey instrument
and sampling plan as well as a proposed data
collection timeline specific to the work order.
Surveyors will be recruited and trained after the survey
instrument, sampling plan, and fielding schedules have
been finalized.
We recommend a target survey sample of no less than
2,500, split across weekday and weekend service
days. A detailed sampling plan will be developed
using actual average daily ridership for each route, and
a fielding plan will be developed identifying on what
routes/trips data collection will take place.
Task 2: Develop Survey Instruments
Moore & Associates has been crafting high-quality
survey instruments designed to obtain clean and
accurate responses for nearly 25 years. As such, we
will design and format the survey instrument so as to
achieve optimal outcome while maintaining an
environmentally sustainable approach. Once
approved, the instrument will be translated into
Spanish and serialized. Among the survey topics we
anticipate are:
• Origin and destination,
• Means of accessing Transfort,
• Home ZIP code,
• Fare media used,
• Use of transfers,
• Reason for riding,
• Frequency of use,
• Response to recent service changes (if desired),
• Barriers to use of public transit,
• Areas for improvement,
• Perception of public transit,
• Current travel behavior,
• Media and Internet usage,
• Sources for service information,
• Access to a personal vehicle,
• Possession of a valid driver’s license, and
• Demographics (age, income, education,
employment, ethnicity, language, etc.).
Where possible, we will utilize questions and response
options consistent with prior survey efforts so as to
facilitate trend analysis.
The draft survey instruments in English will be
submitted for approval. Any requested edits to content
or formatting will be completed within two business
days and resubmitted for final approval. Only once the
final instrument has been approved will we finalize the
instruments and submit them to the City for printing.
An online version of the survey will be created to
facilitate a more technological approach to the survey
as well as reduce the use of paper.
We recommend supplementing the onboard data
collection with an online survey that can be taken at a
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
4
United States, our criteria for selection include the
following:
• Fluency in English and Spanish preferred (written
and oral),
• Ability to read and understand a bus schedule,
• Ability to conform with appearance standards
(“business casual” dress code – black or khaki
pants, polo or collared shirt, and comfortable
shoes),
• No facial tattoos or extensive visible piercings,
• Physical ability to board and ride the bus
unassisted,
• Punctuality (ability to arrive 15 minutes before shift
start),
• Availability of reliable transportation (including
public transit, bicycle, or getting dropped off), and
• Possession of a cell phone for communication
from the field supervisor only.
Prior to fielding the onboard surveys, we will conduct
mandatory training sessions, which City staff will be
invited to attend. The training will consist of
familiarization with the survey instrument, discussion of
recommended approach/practices, instruction
regarding appropriate attire and conduct, an overview
of proper survey etiquette, role-playing of the survey
process, safety, and performance expectations.
Surveyors will be instructed on quality control methods
to ensure all project standards are maintained and
survey participation is as broad as possible. Each
surveyor will also be trained on how to read a driver
paddle and follow his/her collection schedule, as our
sampling plan will be designed to capture data on
specific trips for each route. If any surveyor falls short
of these expectations, he/she will be released and
replaced by a trained back-up surveyor.
Task 4: Develop Quality Control Measures
As a consulting firm, our reputation depends upon the
quality of our work. Consequently, quality control is
extremely important to us. As demonstrated through
success in prior onboard surveys, the use of project
Control Sheets ensures an accurate snapshot of data
collection activity onboard the vehicles. Control Sheets
also allow for the pairing of each survey response with
its respective Transfort bus route. Therefore, response
rate and survey time can be tracked and accounted for
during the analysis.
Task 5: Survey Promotion
As part of the survey process, our in-house marketing
team will work with City staff to develop and produce
promotional materials such as car cards,
posters/flyers, web notices, and seat drops. Once the
materials are approved, the City will print and distribute
them. Such materials may be posted inside the
vehicles, at transit stops, on the respective agency
webpages, and at key transfer locations to increase
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
5
Surveyors will offer the bilingual survey instrument to
Transfort’s customers while also making themselves
available to answer questions regarding the survey. It
has been our experience that some origin and
destination data can be left blank or come across as
confusing to customers, so our surveyors are prepared
to offer their assistance. Surveyors may clarify origin
and destination information with customers so as to get
more accurate and complete data.
Task 7: Track Survey Progress
Upon completion of each surveyor assignment,
completed surveys will be verified by the supervisor for
completeness and accuracy. A summary of project
progress will be sent to Transfort’s project manager at
the end of each data collection day. The raw data from
the survey will be sent in a Microsoft Excel database
upon completion of the initial data entry in Task 9.
Task 8: Review Completed Forms
Survey responses will be checked for completeness at
the time of submission onboard the vehicle to the
greatest extent possible. Whenever possible, any form
with missing information will be returned to the
respondent for clarification. The final count and status
update at the end of each day will only include surveys
determined to fall within the City’s definition of
“complete.”
Task 9: Data Entry
As the survey team receives completed surveys and
enters data into a Microsoft Excel database, the data
will be imported into a Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences (SPSS) database to facilitate data
compilation and analysis. Our market research
manager will ensure the accuracy of the data and
cross check the survey numbers with the
accompanying driver paddle. Survey answers will be
coded into the databases so as to run frequencies and
cross tabulations. A raw data file will be submitted to
the City’s project manager while a separate file will
contain the “cleaned” database.
Once data entry and cleaning is complete, we will
geocode all origin and destination data from the
survey, allowing us to map out where respondents
boarded and alighted. The City will be provided with
the geocoded files for future planning decisions.
Open-ended questions and responses to questions
that include “other” as a choice will be reviewed for
grammar and accuracy. When appropriate, responses
will be cleaned for consistency and/or categorized with
similar responses during analysis. For example, if a
respondent indicates he/she would like “More service
past 9:00 p.m.,” the response will be categorized as
“later service” for analysis purposes.
Task 10: Draft and Final Report
Upon completion of all data entry/cleaning, compilation
of simple frequencies and data cross-tabulations, and
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
6
key findings. Finally, we will prepare a Microsoft
PowerPoint presentation and our project manager will
present findings to the Transfort Board.
Other Surveys
At the sole discretion of the City, our project team will
conduct additional ad-hoc surveys that either augment
the existing survey efforts or develop and conduct
alternative market research tasks. Additional tasks
might include:
• Public opinion polls conducted via telephone and
online;
• Intercept surveys specific to City programs or
activities;
• Boarding/alighting or visitor counts;
• Web surveys and analysis focused on social
media activity, including analysis of social media
traffic (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest),
conducting social media surveys through
Facebook, or conducting Mechanical Turk surveys
through Amazon; and
• Media content analysis.
All additional surveys and other ad-hoc tasks will follow
a similar task management system as outlined in
Tasks 1 through 10.
Anticipated Interaction with the City
In carrying out the onboard survey and any
subsequent market research activities identified in the
Request for Proposals, we propose to employ a project
management strategy designed to minimize delays by
coordinating all project aspects as well as continue
sustainability practices. While our project team can
always be reached by telephone or email, we propose
utilizing the Basecamp web-based platform for day-to-
day communication and interaction with the City.
Basecamp offers a central repository for project files
and communications. Documents and data will be
posted to Basecamp for easy access by the City. This
web-based access is available to both the project team
and client partners, and requires no special software.
We will work with the City to determine appropriate
review periods for various project elements at the time
of project initiation. Maintaining review deadlines is a
key element of keeping the project on track, and we
will ensure the City has ample time to provide
feedback on project deliverables.
Sustainability
Moore & Associates, Inc. strives for sustainability
operations for not only being environmentally
responsible, but for increasing efficiency. Our firm has
made significant progress in several areas that engage
in sustainable practices by rethinking project
implementation. Our web-based project management
strategy allows for real-time communication and acts
as a cloud-based file server. Files and messages can
be uploaded and observed by all parties that are given
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
7
Transit District, Kitsap (WA) Transit, Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority,
Maricopa Association of Governments, Marin Transit
District, Monterey-Salinas Transit, Morongo Basin
Transit Authority, Nassau (NY) Inter-County Express,
Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public
Transportation Authority, Ventura County
Transportation Commission and VIA Metropolitan
Transit (San Antonio, TX). These engagements
included a broad range of projects that measured
customer satisfaction, community awareness and
support, market segmentation, and origin-destination
through onboard, intercept, web-based, telephone, and
focus group methodologies. In addition, we have
conducted onboard data collection with respect to on-
time performance, boarding and alighting counts, and
driver observations. All of these projects were
conducted within the last five years.
References
On the following pages we have provided descriptions
of some of our most applicable market research efforts
references as well as work samples.
Nassau Inter-County Express
Transit Survey Services
Jack Khzouz, Project Manager
700 Commercial Avenue, Garden City, New York 11530
516.296.4152 | jack.khzouz@veoliatransdev.com
In October 2013, Veolia Transportation sponsored an
onboard survey of the Nassau Inter-County Express
(NICE) fixed-route bus service. The purpose of the
survey was to develop a profile of travel and
demographic characteristics of NICE fixed-route
customers in order to ensure compliance with federal
Title VI reporting requirements.
To ensure NICE riders had an equal opportunity to
participate in the survey, Moore & Associates
professionally translated the survey instrument into the
six non-English languages most commonly spoken in
Nassau County (Spanish, Chinese, Italian, Persian,
Korean, and French Creole).
All customers boarding the surveyed routes were
offered the opportunity to take the survey. A sample of
9,430 responses was received. This sample ensured
statistical accuracy of 95 percent and a ±1 percent
margin of error at the system level. Route-specific
sample sizes ensured statistical accuracy of not less
than 95 percent and a ±10 percent margin of error
(based on average daily ridership) at the individual level.
Subsequent analysis by Moore & Associates of the
NICE system as a whole, as well as by individual routes,
revealed no significant barriers arising from ethnicity,
language, or income. Utilizing our in-house GIS
capabilities, overlays of NICE routes against census
block data for minority ethnicities, low-income
populations, senior and youth populations, and
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
8
Across a three-week period our project team
successfully managed the on-board intercept survey in
September 2013. All survey questionnaires were
printed on 100-pound stock to eliminate the need for
clipboards. All survey instruments were printed double-
sided, with English on one side and Spanish on the
other. The data collection covered all SunTran
services, with approximately 9,500 fixed-route surveys
collected against a sample target of 8,980. In addition
to the on-board survey, Moore & Associates distributed
a total of 950 hundred direct-mail surveys to demand-
response customers. This effort resulted in the
collection of 201 valid responses representing a return
rate of over 21 percent. The resulting data was
compiled into a unifying report with tailored analysis
and key findings for each service observed.
Staff: Jim Moore (project manager), Jose Perez (data
analysis and reporting), Chris Vandepas (scheduling,
training, field supervision, data analysis).
Work Sample: Survey instruments and data collection
tools are provided as .pdf documents at the end of this
proposal.
Kitsap Transit
Origin and Destination Survey; Market
Segmentation Survey
Ellen Gustafson, Operations Director
360.478.5491 | elleng@kitsaptransit.com
In 2013, Moore & Associates was selected to complete
three separate, yet related market research tasks for
Kitsap Transit; an on-board intercept customer survey
and follow-up phone survey of willing respondents, and
a Market Segmentation Study (conducted as a phone
survey). The onboard intercept survey collected basic
origin/destination, travel, and demographic information,
as well as contact information from riders willing to
participate in a follow-up phone survey. A sample of
1,472 was achieved from the onboard phase of the
survey. All Kitsap Transit routes were surveyed
throughout all service day-parts to ensure a
representative sampling of the customer base. All
sampling targets were met, resulting in overall
statistical accuracy of 95 percent and a +/- 2.5 percent
margin of error.
For the follow-up customer phone survey, Moore &
Associates conducted a more in-depth phone interview
with a sample of rider respondents indicating a
willingness to participate in a follow-up interview.
Follow-up telephone surveys were conducted with 250
of the original on-board respondents and the results
were recorded using a Computer-Aided Telephone
Interview approach.
The Market Segmentation Study was designed to
optimize the system’s ability to attract current non-
riders and increase its share of the local travel
market. In order to most effectively attract current
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
9
Jose participated in all three of our referenced projects.
Jose will guide our project team throughout the project.
He will act as the direct link to the City’s project
manager and be responsible for ensuring all project
tasks, deliverables, and reports are crafted with
exceptional quality and submitted on schedule.
Joining Jose on the project team will be Chris
Vandepas. Chris, our firm’s Market Research
Coordinator, brings a wealth of experience in market
research and outreach. He served as the lead survey
coordinator for Kitsap Transit (WA), which combined a
variety of survey efforts including a phone survey,
intercept/community survey, onboard survey, and
internet survey. Chris recently completed the annual
Long Beach Community Awareness and transit survey
and the 2014 Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority’s annual survey as well as an
onboard survey in Flagstaff and SANDAG’s pre-BRT
customer survey. He developed survey instruments
for the City of Tucson/Sun Tran’s onboard surveys and
managed the collection process, data entry, data
cleaning and analysis. Chris also coordinated and
conducted surveying for Nassau Inter-County Express,
capturing over 9,000 responses and mapping boarding
and alighting data. Chris participated in all three of our
referenced projects.
Jim Moore, our firm’s founder and managing partner,
will serve as principal-in-charge for this engagement.
As principal-in-charge, his oversight will ensure the full
resources of the firm are available for this
engagement. Jim has more than 30 years of high-
profile transportation experience, including market
research and other service evaluation and planning
projects for more than 150 public transit organizations
throughout the United States. Jim led all three of our
referenced projects as well as development of each
work sample provided for review.
Section 4: Organization Chart
Section 5: Availability
Moore & Associates has ample capacity to conduct the
Transfort onboard survey during the proposed time
period. Several existing projects are scheduled to be
completed during the month of March. While CSU
classes end on May 8 (per calendar.colostate.edu), we
will complete all fieldwork no later than April 30, 2015.
Project manager Jose Perez and Market Research
Coordinator Chris Vandepas are available to attend an
on-site interview during the week of March 16, 2015.
Jose is also available the throughout the full week of
March 23, though Chris’ availability is limited to March
23 and 24 of that week. Principal-in-charge Jim Moore
has limited availability during both weeks.
City of Fort Collins
Project Manager
Jim Moore
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
10
Section 6: Schedule of Rates
Labor (fully burdened rates)
Jose Perez $100.75
Chris Vandepas $79.05
Field Supervisor $54.25
Field Surveyors $22.70
Data Entry $22.70
Marketing Support $85.25
Jim Moore $131.75
Direct Expenses
Color printing/copying $.40/page
Black & white printing/copying $.15/page
Translation $90/page
Postage USPS rates
Travel varies
Section 7: Vendor Statement
I have read and understand the specifications and
requirements for this Request for Proposal and I agree
to comply with such specifications and requirements. I
further agree that the method of award is acceptable to
my company. I also agree to complete
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WORK
ORDER TYPE with the City of Fort Collins within 30
days of notice of award If contract is not completed
and signed within 30 days, City reserves the right to
cancel and award to the next highest rated firm.
FIRM NAME: Moore & Associates, Inc.
ADDRESS: 28159 Avenue Stanford, Suite 110,
Valencia, CA 91355
EMAIL: allison@moore-associates.net
PHONE: 888.743.5977
BIDDER’S NAME: Allison Moore
SIGNATURE:
__________________________
PRIMARY SERVICE ISSUES CONTACT: Jose Perez
TELEPHONE: 888.743.5977
CELL: 619.253.2962
EMAIL: jose@moore-associates.net
Labor Expenses
Title Name Rate Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost
PROJECT MANAGER Jose Perez $70.00 16 $1,120.00 4 $280.00 0 $0.00 2 $140.00 8 $560.00 12 $840.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 8 $560.00 26 $1,820.00 76 $5,320.00
MARKET RESEARCH COORD. Chris Vandepas $51.00 4 $204.00 16 $816.00 4 $204.00 0 $0.00 8 $408.00 8 $408.00 8 $408.00 8 $408.00 8 $408.00 16 $816.00 80 $4,080.00
MARKETING SUPPORT $55.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 8 $440.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 8 $440.00
FIELD SUPERVISOR $35.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 80 $2,800.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 80 $2,800.00
PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE Jim Moore $81.00 2 $162.00 2 $162.00 0 $0.00 2 $162.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 2 $162.00 8 $648.00
22 $1,486.00 22 $1,258.00 4 $204.00 4 $302.00 24 $1,408.00 100 $4,048.00 8 $408.00 8 $408.00 16 $968.00 44 $2,798.00 252 $13,288.00
55% $817.30 $691.90 $112.20 $166.10 $774.40 $2,226.40 $224.40 $224.40 $532.40 $1,538.90 $2,561.90
$2,303.30 $1,949.90 $316.20 $468.10 $2,182.40 $6,274.40 $632.40 $632.40 $1,500.40 $4,336.90 $15,849.90
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,536.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,536.00
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,824.00 $0.00 $1,824.00
$780.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,950.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,730.00
$0.00 $95.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $95.00
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,575.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $280.00 $1,855.00
$780.00 $95.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $11,061.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,824.00 $280.00 $14,040.00
$3,083.30 $2,044.90 $316.20 $468.10 $2,182.40 $17,335.40 $632.40 $632.40 $3,324.40 $4,616.90 $29,889.90
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
11
Section 8: Work Samples
Three work samples are provided to support our proposal. The first is available online, while the remaining two are
appended to our proposal.
1. Nassau Inter-County Express, full project report.
http://www.nicebus.com/NiceBus/media/Nicebus-PDFs/Onboard_Survey_12_2013.pdf
2. City of Tucson/Sun Tran, survey instrument, control sheets, and other materials.
3. Kitsap Transit, full project report.
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
12
City of Tucson/Sun Tran Survey Instrument – English
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
13
City of Tucson/Sun Tran Survey Instrument – Spanish
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
14
City of Tucson/Sun Tran Surveyor Position Description
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
15
City of Tucson/Sun Tran Car Card
City of Tucson/Sun Tran Surveyor Badge
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
16
City of Tucson/Sun Tran Control Sheet
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
17
City of Tucson/Sun Tran Surveyor Training
Transit Passenger Surveys (RFP No. 8061)
City of Fort Collins
Proposal
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2015
18
KITSAP TRANSIT
2013 MARKET RESEARCH STUDIES
Origin & Destination Survey
Market Segmentation Study
Final Report
December 2013
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ..................................................................... iii
Part 1: Origin & Destination Survey
Section 1: Onboard Origin & Destination Survey .......................... 03
Section 2: Follow-Up Telephone Survey ....................................... 21
Part 2: Market Segmentation Study
Section 1: Overview and Methodology ........................................ 37
Section 2: Analysis and Key Findings ............................................ 41
Part 3: Appendices
Appendix A: Survey Instruments ................................................. A-1
Appendix B: Simple Frequencies .................................................. B-1
Onboard Origin & Destination Survey ................................. B-3
Follow-Up Telephone Survey .............................................. B-23
Market Segmentation Study ............................................... B-38
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
ii
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
iii
Executive Summary
Kitsap Transit 2013 Market Research Studies
As the economy recovers and additional transit funding becomes available, Kitsap Transit is considering
potential changes that may include restoring some services cut in recent years as well as adding new
services. To help make informed service changes that best address the needs of its riders, Kitsap Transit
requested the services of a consultant to better understand its customer base in three broad areas:
• Rider origins and destinations,
• Satisfaction with existing transit services, and
• Demographic characteristics that will provide the agency with a better picture of who
currently uses Kitsap Transit as well as fulfill federal Title VI reporting requirements.
Moore & Associates met these objectives in a two-phase process. In the first phase, we conducted an
onboard intercept survey that will gather basic origin and destination information, as well as contact
information from riders who are willing to participate in a follow-up phone survey. In the second phase,
we conducted a more in-depth phone interview with a sample of rider respondents indicating a
willingness to participate in a follow-up interview.
A total sample of 1,472 was achieved from the onboard phase of the survey. All geographic targets
were met, resulting in overall statistical accuracy of 95 percent and a +/- 2.5 percent margin of error.
Follow-up telephone surveys were conducted with 250 of the original onboard respondents.
While planning future changes to best serve the needs of its current rider population, Kitsap Transit also
desired to optimize the system’s ability to attract current non-riders and increase its share of the local
travel market. In order to most effectively attract current non-riders1 to use its services, Kitsap Transit
sought to better understand transit’s broader role in Kitsap County through a dedicated community
survey of those who do not currently use transit. The major themes in conducting the Market
Segmentation Study include:
• Assessing non-riders’ awareness of and attitudes toward existing Kitsap Transit services,
• Characteristics of – and differences between – current riders and non-riders,
• Factors that may encourage or prevent non-riders from using Kitsap Transit services,
and
• Potential measures that Kitsap Transit could take to increase transit usage among
current non-riders.
A total sample of 512 responses was achieved, which reflects an aggregate 95-percent confidence level
and +/- five percent margin of error.
1 Non-riders were defined as those who had not used Kitsap Transit or any of its services within the 90 days prior to survey
contact.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
iv
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
1
Part 1
Kitsap Transit Origin & Destination Survey
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
2
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
3
Section 1
Onboard Origin & Destination Survey
OVERVIEW AND METHODOLOGY
A survey of persons riding Kitsap Transit’s local (fixed-route) bus service was conducted by Moore &
Associates across six consecutive service days: October 1 through October 6, 2013. This coverage plan
ensured that all service days and day-parts were covered. Further, the original data collection period
was postponed until such time when all local schools would be in session.
The goal of the survey was collection of market research information at the rider-level, and included
questions regarding trip purpose, frequency of use, satisfaction regarding a variety of Kitsap Transit
service attributes, mobility options, and demographic information.
At the conclusion of the survey, Kitsap Transit riders were asked if they would be interested in
participating in a brief follow-up telephone survey intended to “drill down” on potential specific
questions/responses. In the event the rider experienced a willingness to participate in the follow-up
survey, we documented their preferred phone number and preferred contact day/time. The goal was to
identify no less than 250 participants for the follow-up survey.
Survey Instrument
The survey instrument (see Appendix A) included 20 “baseline” questions, as well as a number of follow-
up questions depending upon the characteristics/travel patterns of the individual respondent. Once the
survey instrument was approved by Kitsap Transit, it was translated into Spanish. Surveys were printed
double-sided, with Spanish instruments available upon request.
A pretest of the survey instrument was conducted on October 1, 2013. The goal of the pretest was the
identification of possible wording inconsistencies, as well as overall survey “flow,” which could impact
either survey completion or result in possible survey bias. The pretest sample of 80 completed surveys
was equal to 5.3 percent of the target sample size (1,500). No issues regarding the survey instrument
were identified through the pretest. Once completed, the pretest data sample was incorporated into the
full survey data sample.
Sampling Plan
Based on the project goals and objectives outlined in the RFP, Moore & Associates developed a three-
prong sampling plan:
• Numerically sufficient sample size to be considered statistically valid at the 95-percent
confidence level at the “system level”, and 90-percent confidence level at the individual
“geographic level.”
• A sample weighted by ridership so as to reflect usage at the individual route level.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
4
• A sample that provides sufficient contact information to support a statistically valid
sample for the follow-up telephone survey.
The minimum number of valid responses (a.k.a., completed surveys) necessary to achieve a “system
level” confidence level of 95 percent (and +/- 5 percent margin of error) was 370 for Kitsap Transit’s
weekday service and 334 for its Saturday service. However, these sample minimums were not sufficient
to obtain the geographic-specific accuracy required by the RFP. Therefore, our sampling plan
recommended a minimum of 275 valid responses from each designated geographic service area,
resulting in the need for a sample size of no less than 1,500 valid responses. This initial total sample size
assumed six geographic areas. There were actually five, therefore, reducing the total responses needed
to 1,375. While two of the geographic areas did not quite meet the goal of 275 responses, they were
each still sufficient to meet the goal of 90 percent confidence level and a +/- 10 percent margin of error.
Overall, our total sample exceeded the number required for desired statistical accuracy at the
“geographic level” by 7.1 percent, resulting in overall statistical accuracy of 95 percent and a +/- 2.5
percent margin of error.
Exhibit 1.1.1 Sample by Geographic Area
Geographic Area
Sampling
Target
Responses
Collected
Confidence Level
Bainbridge Island 275 269 90% +/- 5%
Bremerton 275 303 90% +/- 4.7%
Port Orchard 275 351 90% +/- 4.4%
Poulsbo 275 273 90% +/- 5%
Silverdale 275 276 90% +/- 5%
Total 1,375 1,472 95% +/- 2.5%
Survey Administration
Moore & Associates contracted with a local temporary staffing agency to assist in the recruitment of
qualified candidates. We sought to recruit individuals with a professional appearance and demeanor, as
well as possessing the skills necessary to conduct the survey. While the staffing firm was responsible for
ensuring each recruit was legally able to work in the United States, Moore & Associates’ qualifying
criteria included the following:
• English proficiency (written and oral)
• Spanish proficiency (written and oral) (no less than 25 percent of surveyor team)
• Ability to read and understand a bus schedule
• Willingness to comply with appearance standards
• Physical ability to board and ride the bus without assistance
• Punctuality (ability/willingness to arrive 15 minutes prior to shift start)
• Access to reliable transportation (including public transit)
• Possession of a mobile phone (for communication with Moore & Associates’ field
supervisors)
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
5
All surveyors/data collectors were screened and trained by our project team. Training included an
overview of the project, familiarization with the Kitsap Transit system, protocol for conducting the
survey, role playing, and discussion of individual assignments.
Our project team trained more surveyors than initially needed in order to have qualified back-up
personnel immediately available should a surveyor fail to report or be dismissed.
Surveyor training was conducted on September 30, 2013, prior to survey pretest fielding. Eight
surveyors were trained. All associated training materials were posted to Basecamp prior to the training
session.
Data Collection
Prior to the pretest, Moore & Associates designed and produced bilingual car cards promoting the
onboard survey. We believe advance notice positively impacts transit riders’ willingness to participate in
an onboard survey.
The vast majority of the surveys were completed via an intercept methodology. That is, every person
(deemed to be 16 years and above) boarding a Kitsap Transit bus during the survey period was asked if
they would be willing to complete a short questionnaire.
Surveyors were readily identifiable by a reflective vest and ID badge worn on a lanyard around the neck.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
6
ANALYSIS AND KEY FINDINGS
Question 4: Where did you come from before catching the bus?
Survey participants were provided with nine response options including “other.” “Home” was the top-
ranked trip origin (49.9 percent), followed by “work” (23 percent) and “other” (9.3 percent).
Exhibit 1.1.2 Trip Origin
Question 6: How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus?
The question was intended to provide insight into rider access. Eight response options were provided
including “other.” Sixty percent of respondents indicated walking to the bus stop. An additional 10.7
percent indicated transferring from another bus, while 10.4 percent indicated connecting from the
Washington State Ferries.
At the time of the survey fielding, Washington State Ferries provided service to downtown Bremerton
and Bainbridge Island. Kitsap Transit operating schedules support convenient timed connections
between bus and ferry.
49.9%
23.0%
2.2%
5.6%
0.1%
5.5%
1.4%
3.0%
9.3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Home
Work
School (K-12)
College
Day care
Shopping/errand
Medical/dental visit
Social/recreational event
Other
n = 1,452
n = 1,454
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
7
Exhibit 1.1.3 Access to Bus Stop
A follow-up question (Question 6a) sought to quantify distance for those respondents who indicated
walking as a means of accessing the Kitsap Transit bus stop. Thirty-nine percent of those who specified
how far they walked said they walked one block or less, while nearly 20 percent indicated 1.5 to two
blocks, and 12.2 percent indicated 2.5 to three blocks.
Exhibit 1.1.4 Access to Bus Stop – Walking Distance
60.0%
8.8%
4.0%
2.8%
10.7%
10.4%
0.8%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Walked ___ blocks
Drove or rode in a car to the bus stop
Drove or rode to a Park & Ride lot
Bicycled
Transferred from another bus
Rode a Washington State Ferry
Rode the Port Orchard/Bremerton foot ferry
Other
n = 1,436
39.2%
19.7%
12.2%
16.5%
8.5%
2.0% 1.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
One
block or
less
1.5 to 2
blocks
2.5 to 3
blocks
4 to 6
blocks
7 to 10
blocks
11 to 15
blocks
More
than 15
blocks
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
8
Question 6b asked those who indicated accessing Kitsap Transit from a Park & Ride Lot to identify which
lot they used. The highest number of respondents cited use of the Gateway/6th and Montgomery lot.
Exhibit 1.1.5 Access to Bus Stop – Park & Ride Lot
Question 6c was included to shed additional light on bus-to-bus connections. Among the 222
respondents who specified where they transferred from, 91 percent indicated making a connection from
another Kitsap Transit bus. Other numerically significant responses included Mason Transit (5 percent),
Jefferson Transit (2.3 percent), and Kitsap Transit Access (2.3 percent).
Exhibit 1.1.6 Access to Bus Stop – Transfer to Another Bus
25.0%
1.9%
1.9%
1.9%
1.9%
5.8%
13.5%
1.9%
3.8%
3.8%
7.7%
7.7%
9.6%
1.9%
11.5%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
6th & Montgomery
Agate Pass
Christ Memorial Church
Day Road
Downtown Port Orchard
Gateway Fellowship
George's Corners
North Kitsap Baptist Church
Port Orchard Armory
Port Orchard Ferry
Poulsbo Junction
Poulsbo Nazarene Church
Suquamish UCC
Walmart (Port Orchard)
Other
n = 52
91.1%
2.0% 4.5%
0.4% 2.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Kitsap Transit Jefferson
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
9
For survey participants indicating a Kitsap Transit intra-service transfer (specific to the surveyed trip),
five routes stood out: Route 11 (10.4 percent), Route 25 (9.5 percent), Route 26 (7.5 percent), Route 32
(7.5 percent), and Route 24 (7.0 percent).
Exhibit 1.1.7 Access to Bus Stop – Intra-Service Transfers
Among survey participants indicating a ferry-to-bus connection (specific to the surveyed trip), nearly 73
percent cited the downtown Seattle/Bainbridge Island service, while 26.6 percent indicated the
downtown Seattle/Bremerton service.
0.5%
0.5%
2.5%
3.0%
0.5%
5.5%
4.5%
10.4%
3.0%
6.5%
6.5%
6.5%
3.5%
1.0%
7.0%
9.5%
7.5%
3.5%
7.5%
5.0%
2.0%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
1.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%
Route 1
Route 3
Route 4
Route 5
Route 7
Route 8
Route 9
Route 11
Route 12
Route 13
Route 17
Route 20
Route 21
Route 23
Route 24
Route 25
Route 26
Route 29
Route 32
Route 35
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
10
Question 7: Where are you going first after completing this trip?
As phrased, this was sort of a combined “destination” and “trip purpose” query, and respondents were
instructed to select only one answer.
“Home” was top-ranked at 39.4 percent, followed by “work” (19.4 percent) and “shopping/errand” (13.3
percent). On answer stood out within the group of “other” responses: “ferry (connection)” at 2.2
percent of all responses.
Exhibit 1.1.8 Trip Destination
39.4%
19.4%
1.9%
6.4%
0.4%
13.3%
2.8%
5.1%
11.3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Home
Work
School (K-12)
College
Day care
Shopping/errand
Medical/dental visit
Social/recreational event
Other
n = 1,441
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
11
Question 9: How will you get from the bus stop to your final destination?
Similar to Question 6, Question 9 included a “baseline” response and several follow-up queries
(depending on the mode of the travel indicated by the respondent).
The most common response was “walk” (66.3 percent), followed by “bus transfer” (14.6 percent) and
“ride in car” (11.1 percent). Interestingly, the Washington State Ferries only attracted 5.3 percent of
associated responses.
Exhibit 1.1.9 Access to Destination
With respect to distance walked (between bus stop and final destination point), responses were similar
to Question 6a: 42.3 percent of those who specified how far they walked said they walked one block or
less, while nearly 18 percent indicated 1.3 to two blocks, and 13.5 percent indicated 2.5 to three blocks.
Exhibit 1.1.10 Access to Destination – Walking Distance
Among those survey participants indicating a transit-to-transit connection, 94.3 percent cited “Kitsap
Transit.” The second-ranked response option was “Kitsap Transit Access” (13.4 percent).
66.3%
11.1%
0.3%
14.6%
5.3%
1.3%
1.1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Walk ___ blocks
Drive or ride in a car
Bicycle
Transfer to another bus
Ride a Washington State Ferry
Ride the Port Orchard/Bremerton foot …
Other
n =
1,421
42.3%
17.5%
13.5%
16.8%
6.7%
1.1% 2.1%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
One
block or
less
1.3 to 2
blocks
2.5 to 3
blocks
4 to 6
blocks
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
12
Exhibit 1.1.11 Access to Destination – Tranfer to Another Bus
For respondents indicating a Kitsap Transit intra-service transfer (specific to the surveyed trip), five
routes stood out: Route 11 (20.6 percent), Route 13 (10.7 percent), Route 8 (7.3 percent), and Routes 9
and 37 (5.6 percent each).
94.3%
0.8% 1.5% 3.4%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Kitsap Transit Jefferson Transit Mason Transit Kitsap Transit
ACCESS
n = 1,473
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
13
Exhibit 1.1.12 Access to Destination – Intra-Service Transfers
Among persons indicating a bus/ferry connection (to complete the surveyed trip), 64.8 percent cited the
Bainbridge Island service, while 33.6 percent indicated the Bremerton service.
1.3%
0.4%
4.7%
3.4%
7.3%
5.6%
0.4%
20.6%
3.0%
10.7%
2.1%
3.0%
2.1%
0.4%
3.0%
3.0%
2.6%
5.2%
4.3%
1.3%
0.4%
5.6%
0.9%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
3.9%
1.7%
0.4%
0.4%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Route 1
Route 3
Route 4
Route 5
Route 8
Route 9
Route 10
Route 11
Route 12
Route 13
Route 17
Route 20
Route 21
Route 23
Route 24
Route 25
Route 26
Route 29
Route 32
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
14
Question 10: How often do you typically ride Kitsap Transit?
Riding five days/week was selected by 37.4 percent of respondents to this question. “Three to four
days/week” garnered 24.2 percent, while “six to seven days/week” was cited by 19.7 percent. Taken
collectively, this very frequent usage suggests a high degree of transit-dependency, which is borne out
by the results of Questions 15 (annual household income).
Exhibit 1.1.13 Frequency of Ridership
Question 11: Please rate how satisfied you are with Kitsap Transit in the following areas. The higher the
number, the greater your satisfaction. (Circle one number on each line.)
For Questions 11 and 12, respondents were asked to rate each attribute on a seven-point scale, wherein
1 = not satisfied and 7 = very satisfied. Regarding customer satisfaction, mean ratings ranged from 4.69
(frequency of service) up to 5.97 (driver courtesy). Service information availability and vehicle
cleanliness were also ranked highly (5.74 and 5.71, respectively). Transit shelters were the next-to-
lowest rated attributed (4.80). These ratings suggest there is room for improvement with regard to
customer satisfaction in these areas.
Exhibit 1.1.14 Satisfaction
9.6% 9.1%
24.2%
37.4%
19.7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Less than
once a
week
1-2 days
each week
3-4 days
each week
5 days each
week
6-7 days
each week
n = 1,432
4.80
4.69
5.53
5.71
5.55
5.74
5.97
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Transit shelters
Frequency of service
Bus/ferry connections
Clean buses
On-time performance
Service information availability
Driver courtesy
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
15
Question 12: Please rate how important each of these Kitsap Transit service features is to you. The
higher the number, the more important it is to you. (Circle one number on each line.)
Using the same scale as Question 11, respondents were asked to indicate the importance of each
attribute, wherein 1 = not important and 7 = very important. On-time performance was rated as most
important, with a mean rating of 6.44, followed by frequency of service (6.28) and bus/ferry connections
(6.15). Transit shelters was rated least important (5.30), which somewhat lessens the impact of the low
satisfaction rating for transit shelters in Question 11.
Exhibit 1.1.15 Importance of Service Features
Question 13: Did you have a vehicle available that you could have used for this trip?
Approximately one-third of respondents cited having access to a vehicle for this trip. This finding
reinforces the observation that a large percentage of Kitsap Transit riders are ride-dependent.
Exhibit 1.1.16 Vehicle Availability
5.30
6.28
6.15
5.87
6.44
5.91
6.13
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Transit shelters
Frequency of service
Bus/ferry connections
Clean buses
On-time performance
Service information availability
Driver courtesy
n = 1,376
n = 1,360
n = 1,374
n = 1,370
n = 1,379
n = 1,380
n = 1,375
Have
vehicle
available,
36.8%
No vehicle
available,
63.2%
n = 1,412
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
16
Question 14: Do you have a valid driver’s license?
More than 42 percent of respondents said they did not possess a valid driver’s license. Perhaps even
more so than access to a vehicle, this data suggests that for many riders, even if they had access to a
personal vehicle (such as a family car), they could not drive it because they do not have a driver’s
license.
Exhibit 1.1.17 Possession of Valid Driver’s License
Question 15: What is your approximate annual household income?
More than 42 percent seleted the lowest household income option – less than $15,000 annually.
Depending on the size of the household, many of these individuals are at risk for being below federal
poverty guidelines. Currently, $15,510 is the poverty threshold for a two-person household.
Consequently, cost is likely very important to these individuals, and any consideration of a future fare
increase must keep the impact on these ride-dependent customers in mind.
Exhibit 1.1.18 Annual Household Income
Have valid
driver's
license
57.2%
No valid
driver's
license
42.8%
n =
1,417
42.1%
13.8% 13.7%
9.9%
7.8% 9.1%
2.0% 1.6%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Less than
$15,000
$15,000
to
$34,999
$35,000
to
$49,999
$50,000
to
$74,999
$75,000
to
$99,999
$100,000
to
$149,999
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
17
Question 16: Which age group are you in?
The most well-represented age group was riders age 25 to 34 (20.2 percent), followed by those age 45
to 54 (17.2 percent). Riders 60 years of age and older and under 19 years of age were the least
represented within the survey sample.
Exhibit 1.1.19 Rider Age
Question 17: Which of the following best describes your ethnic background?
Sixty-nine percent of respondents described themselves as Caucasian, with other ethnic groups being
fairly consistently represented at between five and seven percent each. This is consistent with the
observed language preferences of the customer base, wherein no one elected to take the survey in
Spanish or Tagalog, and is reinforced by responses to Question 18.
Exhibit 1.1.20 Rider Ethnicity
1.6%
6.8%
14.8%
20.2%
15.9%
17.2%
9.8%
7.4%
6.1%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
12-15 years 16-18 years 19-24 years 25-34 years 35-44 years 45-54 years 55-59 years 60-64 years 65+ years
n = 1,415
5.8%
6.9%
5.2%
5.4%
69.0%
5.8%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Asian/Pacific Islander
African-American
Hispanic/Latino
Native American/Alaskan Native
Caucasian
Other
n = 1,473
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
18
Question 18: What languages are spoken in your home? (select all that apply)
English is, by far, the dominant language among surveyed Kitsap Transit riders. More than 94 percent
speak English at home. Spanish is the most frequently spoken non-English language, representing 5.2
percent of the sample. However, speaking another language at home does not necessarily translate into
lack of proficiency in English, as noted by the fact that no respondents elected to take the survey in an
alternate language.
Exhibit 1.1.21 Home Language
94.2%
5.2%
2.2% 3.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
English Spanish Tagalog Other
n = 1,743
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
19
Question 19: What is your home ZIP code?
Nearly 98 percent of those providing a home ZIP code indicated a home location within the state of
Washington. Of those living in Washington, just over 93 percent indicated residence within Kitsap
County. Another two percent cited ZIP codes from King County, while 1.1 percent cited ZIP codes from
Jefferson County and one percent from Pierce County.
Among Kitsap County respondents, nearly 75 percent hailed from ZIP codes representing Port Orchard,
Bremerton, and Suquamish. All Kitsap County ZIP codes cited by respondents are presented in Exhibit
1.1.22.
Exhibit 1.1.22 Home ZIP Code
ZIP Code Percentage Location
98366 19.7% Port Orchard
98312 15.7% Bremerton
98370 13.6% Suquamish
98310 12.0% Bremerton
98110 9.7% Bainbridge Island
98337 7.8% Bremerton
98311 6.5% Silverdale
98383 4.7% Silverdale
98367 3.9% Bremerton
98346 2.2% Kingston
98392 2.1% Suquamish
98342 0.8% Indianola
98315 0.4% Silverdale
98340 0.2% Hansville
98359 0.2% Olalla
98380 0.2% Seabeck
98314 0.1% Bremerton
98345 0.1% Keyport
98364 0.1% Port Gamble
98378 0.1% Retsil
98384 0.1% South Colby
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
20
Question 20: What is your gender?
Males make up a slight majority of the survey sample (just over 55 percent).
Exhibit 1.1.23 Rider Gender
Question 21: Would you be interested in participating in a short follow-up telephone survey to discuss
your transit needs?
More than 31 percent indicated they would be willing to participate in the follow-up telephone survey.
This translated to a sample of 460 individuals who provided their contact information.
Exhibit 1.1.24 Follow-Up Telephone Survey
Male
55.3%
Female
44.7%
n = 1,404
Yes
31.2%
No
68.8%
n = 1,473
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
21
Section 2
Follow-Up Telephone Survey
OVERVIEW AND METHODOLOGY
The onboard survey of Kitsap Transit riders conducted during early October 2013 included an
opportunity for respondents to indicate willingness to participate in a follow-up survey. This second
survey was intended to solicit additional details regarding travel patterns, service satisfaction,
preferences/priorities regarding potential future service enhancements and pricing sensitivity. The goal
of 250 valid survey completions was exceeded.
The survey questions, response options, and sequence of questions were determined by Kitsap Transit.
Because the pool of potential follow-up survey participants was “self-selective,” a qualifier question
confirming that the candidate was at least 16 years of age was included. All follow-up survey
participants met this age qualifier.
The follow-up survey was conducted via phone across a two-week period in late October 2013. Each
prospective candidate was asked to provide a contact phone number and preferred call time. While
each phone surveyor was bilingual (English/Spanish), every follow-up survey was completed in English.
A copy of the survey instrument appears in Appendix A.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
22
ANALYSIS AND KEY FINDINGS
Question 1: What is the primary reason you choose to ride Kitsap Transit?
Survey participants were provided with nine response options including “other.” Five of the response
options garnered double-digit tallies” “do not own car” (33.9 percent), “lack of access to a personal
vehicle” (15.1 percent), “cost” (14.3 percent), “unable to drive” (13.1 percent), and “prefer to use public
transit” (10.4 percent).
Exhibit 1.2.1 Reason for Riding
Give two of the response options were very close in meaning, we believe it is reasonable to conclude
that “lack of access to a personal vehicle” is the primary motivator for choosing Kitsap Transit. While
the “unable to drive” category could be some persons who are too young to drive, the number is likely
to be very modest given the “age qualifier” question. Rather, we believe this subset is composed chiefly
of seniors, which is borne out by the results of Question 5 (fare category), wherein 43 percent of
respondents indicated use of a “discounted fare.” Further, as noted in Question 14a (“other school”),
only a modest number of respondents indicated enrollment in a school other than post-secondary.
Of greatest interest was the 10.4 percent who indicated a preference for riding public transit. The
survey could have been enhanced by the inclusion of a “value-oriented” question, which could have
shed light on a possible link between “perceived value” and support for possible future transportation
funding initiatives.
14.3%
3.6%
15.1%
6.4%
2.8%
13.1%
10.4%
33.9%
0.4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Cost Proximity to
my
destination
Lack of access
to a personal
vehicle
Avoid
traffic/parking
Sustainability/
"going green"
Unable to
drive
Prefer to use
public transit
Do not own a
car
Other -
Distance
n = 251
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
23
Question 2: How long have you be a Kitsap Transit rider?
Two responses stand out: 29.5 percent indicated “10 years or more,” while 19.1 percent cited “less than
one year.”
The first speaks to an unusually high rider retention, which can also have implications regarding “transit
dependency” as well as preferred use by “choice riders.” The second is a higher-than-typical annual
“churn,” especially for a small urban operator. We recommend Kitsap Transit keep this “turnover
factor” in mind as it crafts its future marketing/public communications initiatives. We believe the survey
would have benefited from the inclusion of a question intended to identify “preferred
communications/marketing channels.”
Exhibit 1.2.2 Length of Patronage
19.1%
17.9% 17.9%
15.5%
29.5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Less than 1 year 1-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10 years or
more
n = 251
n = 251
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
24
Question 3: How would you travel if Kitsap Transit were not available?
Seven response options including “other” were provided.
Taken collectively, the responses serve as evidence of a relatively high degree of “ride-dependency”
among the surveyed population. [Note: Given the relatively small sample size as well as the “self-
selecting” nature of the survey, we cannot draw a direct link between this effort and the “total
population” of Kitsap Transit riders.] For example, nearly 40 percent of respondents indicated either
“walking” or “wouldn’t make trip” if Kitsap Transit were not available. If you add in the near-21 percent
who cited reliance upon a “family member,” the total grows to 60 percent. Conversely, less than 22
percent of respondents stated they would “drive my own vehicle.”
Exhibit 1.2.3 Alternatives to Kitsap Transit
21.9%
9.2%
20.7%
26.7%
6.4%
12.7%
0.8% 0.4% 0.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Drive my
own vehicle
Ride a
bicycle
Ride with a
friend or
family
member
Walk Take a taxi Wouldn't
make the
trip
Other -
Kitsap
Transit
ACCESS
Other -
Hitchhike
Other -
Skateboard
n = 251
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
25
Question 4: How do you typically pay for your trip on Kitsap Transit?
Five response options were provided including “other.” The ORCA “smart card” attracted nearly 62
percent of all responses, nearly three times greater than any other response. “Cash fare” (single ride)
came in second at nearly 22 percent, while Kitsap Transit’s monthly pass had 12 percent.
Clearly this speaks to the popularity of the ORCA card with the survey population.
Exhibit 1.2.4 Fare Media Used
Question 5: Which fare category typically applies to you?
Exhibit 1.2.5 Fare Category
Cash fare
(single ride)
21.9%
Kitsap Transit
monthly pass
12.0%
U-Pass
3.6%
ORCA card e-
purse
61.8%
Other
0.8%
n = 251
Regular fare
56.8%
Discounted fare
43.2%
n = 250
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
26
Question 6: How do you typically obtain information about Kitsap Transit services?
Three of the nine response options attracted numerically significant totals.
Far and away the most common means of accessing Kitsap Transit service information was “online”
(45.8 percent). We believe it is reasonable to conclude that “cell phone/mobile device” (9.6 percent)
can be combined with “online” for an aggregate of more than 55 percent.
This was followed by “printed materials” (17.1 percent) and “on the bus” (12.4 percent). We also
believe it is reasonable to conclude that “from the driver” can be combined with “on the bus” for an
aggregate of nearly 21 percent.
Interestingly, “call center” only attracted 10 percent of responses to this question. While “online”
informational resources are generally preferred by younger riders, the traditional call center remains
popular among older transit riders.
Exhibit 1.2.6 Service Information Source
45.8%
9.6%
17.1%
10.0%
0.4%
8.4%
12.4%
0.4%
1.6%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Online Cell phone/
mobile
device
Printed
materials
Call center School From the
driver
On the bus No response Other
n = 251
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
27
Question 7: On a scale of one to seven (wherein one equals “not satisfied” and seven equals “very
satisfied”), please describe your level of satisfaction with the following service attributes.
Question 7 asked survey participants to quantify their level of satisfaction regarding a menu of services
attributes by means of seven-point scale. [Note: While use of an odd-number scale eliminates “fence-
sitting,” a three- or five-point rating scale would likely have been more effective.] In this instance, the
higher the number, the greater the degree of satisfaction.
“Overall satisfaction” earned a rating of 5.99, which is very strong. Other service characteristics earning
high ratings were “comfort onboard vehicle” (6.12), “safety onboard vehicle” (6.39), and “customer call
center” (6.19).
The lowest-rated service attribute was “comfort at bus stops” (5.24). Based on our field observations
during the associated ride check, we believe this ranking is justified.
Exhibit 1.2.7 Service Attribute Satisfaction Ratings
5.11
5.78
6.12
5.24
6.36
5.80
5.73
5.96
5.94
6.19
5.99
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hours of Operation
Travel Time
Comfort Onboard
Comfort Bus Stop
Safety Onboard
Safety Bus Stop
Fare
Reliability
Accessibility
Call Center
Overall Satisfaction
n = 249
n = 245
n = 248
n = 251
n = 251
n = 250
n = 251
n = 250
n = 251
n = 251
n = 251
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
28
Question 8: How important is cost in making your decision to ride Kitsap Transit?
Fifty-seven percent of respondents indicated that “price” was an influencing factor regarding their
decision to ride Kitsap Transit.
Exhibit 1.2.8 Importance of Cost
Question 9: How much more would you be willing to pay per trip for more transit service?
The results of Question 9 reveal that more than 54 percent of respondents would be willing to pay up to
50 cents more (per one-way unlinked trip). Conversely, a combined 37 percent indicated no support for
a fare increase.
Exhibit 1.2.9 Potential for Fare Increase
It is typical for a transit operator to experience ridership loss during the first year a fare increase is
implemented. This negative ridership impact can be calculated by the fare elasticity formula which
attributes a 0.4-percent decrease in ridership for every one-percent increase in fare. If a fifty-cent fare
increase were implemented, it would likely result in a 10 percent reduction in ridership. A fare increase
of twenty-five cents would result in a five percent decrease in ridership.
Important
57.4%
Not important
5.2%
Neutral/no
opinion
37.5%
n = 251
21.1%
32.3%
9.6%
23.5%
13.5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
25 cents more 50 cents more 75 cents more Would not be
willing to pay
more
Prefer to pay less
for the current
n=service 251
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
29
This is applicable to fare decreases as well, resulting in a potential increase in ridership.2
Question 10: What potential service improvement is most important to you?
A variety of response options were provided. Four garnered the majority of responses: “Sunday service”
(36 percent), “more weekend service” (26 percent), “later service” (19.2 percent), and “more frequent
service” (16.4 percent). [Note: Due to some respondents offering multiple responses, the total number
of responses adds up to more than 100 percent.] At the time of the survey, Kitsap Transit provided
reduced service hours on Saturday, and no Sunday service.
We believe the survey could have been improved by including “improved bus stop amenities” as a
response option, especially given the results of Question 7.
With respect to possible expansion of service hours, a start time of 5 a.m. was top-ranked, while an end
time of 10 p.m. was top-ranked.
Exhibit 1.2.10 Preferred Service Improvement
2 McCollom, Brian E. and Richard H. Pratt. Transportation Research Board. TCRP Report 95 Transit Pricing and Fares, “Chapter
12, Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes.” (Washington D.C., 2004)
16.4%
26.0%
1.6%
19.2%
4.0%
36.0%
4.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
More frequent
service
More weekend
service
Improved transfer
centers
Later operating/
service hours
Earlier operating/
service hours
Sunday service Other
n = 250
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
30
Question 11: Would you support the introduction of a fast passenger-only ferry between Kitsap County
and Seattle?
Absent any details regarding service schedule and/or forecast voyage duration, more than 88 percent of
respondents indicated support for a “fast ferry” service. At the time of the survey fielding, two
Washington State Ferry services linked Kitsap County and downtown Seattle. The Bainbridge Island
service has a typical trip duration of 35 minutes, while the Bremerton service has a travel time of
approximately one hour.
It is generally believed the proposed “fast ferry” would link Bremerton and downtown Seattle with a
forecast trip duration of 35 minutes.
Exhibit 1.2.11 Support for Passenger-Only Ferry
Yes
88.4%
No
11.6%
n = 251
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
31
Question 12: How much would you be willing to pay for a one-way fast passenger-only ferry to Seattle?
At the time of the survey, the Washington State Ferries’ service linking Bremerton and Bainbridge Island
to downtown Seattle offered an adult “foot passenger” roundtrip fare of $7.85.
Respondents could indicate an amount ranging from zero to 10 dollars. The most common response
was “five dollars.” The most “popular” price range was “four to eight dollars.”
Exhibit 1.2.12 Fare for Passenger-Only Ferry
Question 13: Are there any additional comments you would like to add about how Kitsap Transit could
improve its service?
This was an open-ended question. Therefore, Moore & Associates utilized its professional judgment to
distill the subjective responses into 30 discernable categories. Of the 251 survey sample, 114 persons
opted to answer Question 13. Further, given the way the question was crafted, many respondents
provided multiple comments within their responses. [Note: It should be noted that the “driver”
category included positive comments about specific drivers.]
Four response categories stood out: “provide Sunday service” (35.1 percent), “expand Saturday service
hours” (20.2 percent), “expand weekday service hours” (17.5 percent), and “bus stop/transit center
improvements” (17.5 percent).
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
$0.00
$0.75
$1.00
$1.75
$10.00
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.25
$3.50
$4.00
$5.00
$5.50
$5.75
$6.00
$6.10
$6.50
$7.00
$7.25
$7.30
$7.50
$7.70
$8.00
$8.25
$9.00
$9.50
Meanprice: $5.28 n = 182
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
32
Exhibit 1.2.13 Additional Comments
1.8%
0.9%
0.9%
17.5%
1.8%
2.6%
6.1%
1.8%
14.0%
20.2%
17.5%
0.9%
4.4%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
1.8%
11.4%
1.8%
1.8%
0.9%
0.9%
2.6%
1.8%
4.4%
0.9%
35.1%
1.8%
3.5%
3.5%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Better understanding of disabled passenger …
Bigger buses/greater seating capacity
Bus line-up at transit center
Bus stop/transit center improvements
Call center
Communication with customers
Connection with ferries
Dedicated bus lane
Drivers
Expanded hours on Saturday
Expanded hours on weekdays
Fares
Ferry service
Holiday service
Improve child safety on buses
Later service before holidays
More bus stops
More routes/expanded service
Onboard announcements
Online resources
On-time performance
Overcrowding
Park & Ride lots
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
33
Question 14: Are you a student?
Twenty-seven percent of respondents indicated being part-time or full-time students. The majority
were college students, though some high school students were represented.
Exhibit 1.2.14 Student Status
Exhibit 1.2.15 School Attended
Full-time
student, 78.7%
Part-time
student, 21.3%
n = 61
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
33
2
2
2
1
2
2
4
1
1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Antioch University
Argosy University
Brandman University
Charter College
Everest College
Gonzaga University
ITT Technical Institute
Olympic College - Bremerton
Olympic College - Poulsbo
Seattle Central Community College
The Art Institute of Seattle
University of Phoenix
University of Washington
Washington State University
Renaissance Alt. High School
College
High school n = 55
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
34
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
35
Part 2
Kitsap Transit Market Segmentation Survey
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
36
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
37
Section 1
Overview and Methodology
To support its future service development activities, Kitsap Transit engaged Moore & Associates, Inc. to
conduct a statistically-valid telephone survey of households located throughout Kitsap County. While
the parallel onboard survey targeted current Kitsap Transit riders, the telephone survey focused on non-
riders and was crafted to address the following:
1) Assess non-rider awareness of – and attitudes regarding – current Kitsap Transit
services.
2) Define and quantify the current mobility needs and travel patterns of non-riders.
3) Identify barriers which either influence or prevent use of public transit.
4) Identify actions which Kitsap Transit could take that would potentially convert non-
riders into riders.
Sampling Plan
The sampling plan included weighted population-based numerical targets for each of the 12 ZIP codes
assigned to Kitsap County. These sampling targets represent a proportional percentage of the total
sample size (512) based on each ZIP code’s respective share of the total population. The sample size of
512 reflects an aggregate 95-percent confidence level and +/- five percent margin of error.
Exhibit 2.1.1 presents the sample target by individual ZIP code.
Exhibit 2.1.1 Sample by ZIP Code
ZIP Code
Sampling
Target
Surveys
Collected
98110 80 63
98311 83 56
98312 126 102
98315 13 4
98340 8 10
98346 36 24
98359 14 5
98366 121 75
98367 87 60
98370 96 66
98380 13 19
98383 73 28
Total 750 512
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
38
Survey Instrument
The survey (see Appendix A) included 25 questions, with a completion length of between 10 and 12
minutes. Kitsap Transit elected to use a prior survey instrument; as such, Moore & Associates did not
develop the survey instrument cited herein.
The survey was available in English, Spanish, and Tagalog; and was administered by a team of trained,
bilingual surveys directly supervised by Moore & Associates’ staff.
A pretest of the English-language version of the survey was conducted in late August 2013. The pretest
sought to identify potential inconsistencies and/or biases with respect to the proposed survey
instrument. The pretest sample size was equal to no less than five percent (25) of the total sample size
(512). No issues regarding survey administration or the survey instrument itself were identified during
the pretest.
Once completed, the pretest data sample was incorporated into the full survey data.
Survey Administration
Moore & Associates utilized a random-digit dialer (RDD) in order to include both landline and mobile
telephone numbers within the survey sample. By pairing area codes/prefixes specific to Kitsap County
and randomly-generated four-digit suffixes, our sample represented a true random selection of
households, while also incorporating geographic weighting by zip code. For example, the area
code/prefix combination of (360) 265 is assigned to mobile phones in and around Silverdale, while the
(206) 780 combination reflects traditional landlines on Bainbridge Island.
The survey was conducted across both afternoon and evening day-parts during both weekdays and
weekends. Any household which declined to participate in the survey was placed on a “do not call” list,
and no further contact was made.
Each randomly-generated phone number was attempted up to five times, after which the number was
“retired.” Call attempts which resulted in either a fax or modem tone were immediately removed from
the pool of available numbers.
In placing the calls, surveyors introduced themselves as calling on behalf of Kitsap Transit, and sought
permission to conduct the survey. Once the caller’s consent was obtained, a series of three qualifying
(a.k.a., screening) questions was posed:
1. Are you 16 years of age or older?
2. What is your home zip code?
3. Have you used any of the following Kitsap Transit services within the prior 90 days?
If the potential survey participant matched the desired qualifications, the survey call continued. If any
of the screening criteria resulted in a “negative” response, the surveyor politely concluded the call.
A phone surveyor would conduct the survey by reading each question, and then offering a series of
potential responses. In the event a survey question included an open-ended response option, the
surveyor made verbatim documentation of the response provided. If the caller was unclear as to the
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
39
phrasing of a survey question or potential response, the surveyor sought to provide clarification while
not “leading” the caller.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
40
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
41
Section 2
Analysis and Key Findings
A survey sample of 512 valid responses (i.e., completed calls) was achieved. Despite offering the option
of both Spanish and Tagalog language versions of the survey, 93.4 percent of the phone surveys were
completed in English. Only 34 survey participants elected to complete the survey in Spanish.
Question 1: Are you aware of any public transit systems in your region?
Every respondent indicated some level of “unaided” awareness regarding the array of public transit
services operating either within Kitsap County and/or the greater Seattle/Tacoma Metro area. Not
surprisingly, the two operators with the greatest awareness were King County Metro and Washington
State Ferries.
Exhibit 2.2.1 Public Transit Awareness
King County
Metro
51.8%
Sound Transit
5.0%
Washington
State Ferries
18.2%
"Passenger-only
ferries"/foot
ferries
4.7%
Pierce Transit
0.3%
Community
Transit
1.2%
Other
18.8%
n = 340
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
42
Question 2: Are you aware of Kitsap Transit and/or any of the services it provides?
Seventy-seven percent of survey respondents indicated some level of “unaided” awareness regarding
Kitsap Transit and/or the services it provides. Given the pool of respondents was composed solely of
non-riders, we believe this speaks strongly to Kitsap Transit’s overall brand recognition.
Exhibit 2.2.2 Awareness of Kitsap Transit
Aware of Kitsap
Transit
77.1%
Not aware of
Kitsap Transit
22.9%
n = 485
Question 3: Overall, is your perception of Kitsap Transit positive, negative, or neutral?
Response to Question 3 was limited to those survey participants who indicated some level of “unaided”
awareness regarding Kitsap Transit and/or any of the services it provides. Of 410 potential respondents,
57.6 percent cited a positive perception of Kitsap Transit, while an additional 34 percent indicated
neutral (a.k.a., no opinion) perception.
Exhibit 2.2.3 Overall Perception
Positive
57.6%
Negative
8.3%
Neutral
34.1%
n = 410
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
43
While brand awareness (Question 2) is important, the results of Question 3 suggest Kitsap Transit has
not been entirely successful in converting awareness to positive perception, which in turn leads to, at a
minimum, possible patronage (i.e., increased ridership), but ideally also support (i.e., voter support
regarding possible future public transit funding initiatives).
A number of our clients have solidified the link between brand awareness and brand support through
development of periodic op-ed pieces in their community newspapers, often functioning as informal
“report cards” to the community at-large.
Question 4: How did you come to this perception?
Survey participants were provided with four response options: personal experience, discussions with
Kitsap Transit customers, discussions with family/friends, and media sources. Personal experience
(which assumes some level of actual Kitsap Transit patronage occurred prior to the 90-day qualifier
period) garnered 57.4 percent, while discussions with family/friends was second-ranked at nearly 21
percent.
Exhibit 2.2.4 Perception Development
Personal
experience with
Kitsap Transit
services
64.3%
Discussions with
Kitsap Transit
customers
13.2%
Discussions with
family/friends
8.9%
Media sources
(such as news
articles, online
information, social
media, etc.)
4.5%
Other (specify)
9.2%
n = 403
While the responses to later questions in the survey shed possible light on the changing perceptions of
former Kitsap Transit riders (i.e., what factors influenced their opinion), the fact high incidence of
“family/friends” is noteworthy. Specifically, this underscores both the importance and potential value of
transit-rider testimonials (formal as well as informal) as a mechanism of opinion shaping within the
community at-large. For example, Moore & Associates has assisted several of our clients in the
development of print media advertising campaigns featuring positive testimonials provided by transit
riders. These relatively low-cost efforts have helped offset the “transit is an important community
service, just not for me” mindset.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
44
Question 5: Has your perception of Kitsap Transit changed across the past year?
Seventy-six percent of respondents indicated some change in mindset within the prior 12 months, either
regarding Kitsap Transit in general or a specific Kitsap Transit service initiative and/or policy.
Exhibit 2.2.5 Change in Perception
Yes, perception
has changed,
76.2%
No, perception
has not
changed, 23.8%
n = 512
Unfortunately, the follow-up questions (Has it changed positively or negatively?) failed to reveal any
insight.
Exhibit 2.2.6 Change in Perception - Positive or Negative?
Positive change
51.5%
Negative
change
48.5%
n = 33
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
45
Question 6: What is the primary reason you have not used Kitsap Transit in the past 90 days?
Survey participants were provided with 12 possible response options, from which they were allowed to
select all that applied. “Prefer to drive myself” was selected by 54.5 percent of respondents. This was
followed by “convenience” and “does not travel where I need to go” at 13.3 percent and 9.8 percent,
respectively.
“Service reliability” (including poor on-time performance) was cited by only three percent, while “cost”
was identified by just 2.7 percent.
Exhibit 2.2.7 Reason for Not Using Kitsap Transit
2.7%
13.3%
0.8%
9.8%
6.1%
1.4% 1.6%
7.4%
54.5%
10.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Cost Convenience Safety Does not
travel where
I need to go
Does not
travel when I
need to go
Reliability of
services
On-time
performance
is poor
Bus stop too
far from my
origin and/or
destination
Prefer to
drive myself
Other
(specify)
n = 512
We believe the above represents to an important opportunity for Kitsap Transit to target individuals
who both reside and work in Kitsap County, especially persons with traditional work hours (a.k.a., 8 a.m.
to 5 p.m.) at employers within reasonable walking distance of a Kitsap Transit route alignment. While it
is unlikely such individuals could be convinced to go totally “car-free,” there is potential to capture a
portion of their home-to-work trips through targeted marketing promoting Kitsap Transit’s low-cost
(versus driving alone) and perceived service reliability.
Question 7: Which of the following service improvements could motivate you to use public transit for
some or all of your local travel needs?
This question sought to identify the preferred improvements (or changes) which Kitsap Transit could
implement, thereby causing a change in the travel behavior of the respondent. While more than half of
respondents said nothing could motivate them to use public transit, the remainder ranked their top
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
46
When all responses were combined (regardless of ranking), “nothing” still received the highest number
of responses (38.1 percent). Of the service improvements, “more convenient routes” was selected most
frequently (21.2 percent), followed by “higher service frequency” (11.6 percent) and “lower fares” (5.0
percent).
Exhibit 2.2.8 Preferred Service Improvements (Combined)
21.2%
11.6%
4.5%
1.8%
5.0%
1.9% 1.5%
7.3%
4.1% 2.7%
0.3%
38.1%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
More
convenient
routes
Higher
service
frequency
Improved
reliability
Improved
on-time
performance
Lower fares Improved
safety at
stops and/or
transit
centers
Improved
safety
onboard
vehicles
Provide
Sunday
service
Expanded
weekday
hours
Expanded
Saturday
hours
More
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
47
Question 8: If a “fast ferry” service was introduced between Bremerton and downtown Seattle, would
you ride it?
Absent any details regarding service schedule and/or forecast voyage duration, 55 percent of
respondents indicated a likely use of the “fast ferry” service. At the time of the survey fielding, two
Washington State Ferry services linked Kitsap County and downtown Seattle. The Bainbridge Island
service has a typical trip duration of 35 minutes, while the Bremerton service has a travel time of
approximately one hour.
It is generally believed the proposed “fast ferry” would link Bremerton and downtown Seattle with a
forecast trip duration of 35 minutes.
Exhibit 2.2.9 Potential Use of Proposed “Fast Ferry” Service
Would ride,
55.3%
Would not ride,
44.7%
n = 506
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
48
Question 9: If “fast ferry” service was introduced between Bremerton and downtown Seattle, how much
would you be willing to pay for a one-way trip?
Respondents were provided with pricing options varying from 50 cents to 40 dollars. At the time of the
survey, the Washington State Ferries’ service linking Bremerton and Bainbridge Island to downtown
Seattle offered an adult “foot passenger” roundtrip fare of $7.85. While service pricing is largely a
function of operating cost, four potential one-way fare amounts garnered the greatest numbers of
respondents: five dollars (102), three dollars (40), ten dollars (31), and seven dollars (28).
Exhibit 2.2.10 “Fast Ferry” One-Way Cost
39.3%
56.0%
4.2%
0.0% 0.6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Less than $5.00 $5.00 to
$10.00
$10.01 to
$15.00
$15.01 to
$20.00
More than
$20.00
n = 361
Question 10: Currently Kitsap Transit charges two dollars for a one-way general passenger fare, and also
offers a fare at one dollar for Medicare card holders, youth, seniors, and persons with disabilities. Do
you believe these fares are…
Exhibit 2.2.11 Appropriateness of Kitsap Transit Fares
Appropriate
82.4%
Too high
13.2%
Too low
4.5%
n = 494
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
49
Question 11A: What do you think is a fair price to charge for a one-way trip onboard Kitsap Transit local
bus service?
“Fairness” is a highly subjective term. It is often influenced by a combination of affordability as well as
perceived value. At the time of the survey fielding, the adult one-way fare for a Kitsap Transit local
service trip was two dollars.
The two-dollar, one-way fare price-point was selected by 52 percent of respondents, while “one dollar”
was chosen by 13.5 percent. This is consistent with the number of respondents citing the current fare as
“appropriate” in Question 10.
Exhibit 2.2.12 Fair One-Way Cost for Kitsap Transit Local Fixed-Route Service
7.1%
87.2%
4.5%
1.2%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Less than $1.00 $1.00 - $2.00 $2.01 - $3.00 More than $3.00
n = 421
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
50
Question 11B: What do you think is a fair price to charge for a one-way trip onboard Kitsap Transit’s
passenger-only ferry (a.k.a., “foot ferry”)?
The five-dollar, one-way fare price-point was selected by 16.4 percent of respondents. A fare of three
dollars was chose by 12.9 percent, while two dollars was identified by 12.5 percent.
At the time of the survey fielding, the adult one-way fare for the “foot ferry” was two dollars.
Exhibit 2.2.13 Fair One-Way Cost for Foot Ferry
65.9%
33.1%
0.7% 0.2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Less than $5.00 $5.00 to $10.00 $10.01 to $15.00 More than $15.00
n = 402
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
51
Question 12: Would you support a dedicated tax to improve local public transit service?
A simple numerical majority (50.4 percent) indicated support of a potential future tax dedicated to local
transit service improvement. This is not insignificant given the pool of respondents was composed
solely of non-transit riders. However, the simple majority assumes Kitsap Transit would address the
“voter condition” of successfully communicating the anticipated benefits of a future tax measure
throughout the Kitsap community at-large. Further, transit-dedicated funding initiatives have
historically required more than a simple vote majority (i.e., two-thirds) to be successful.
Conversely, a full one-third of respondents indicated no support for a future tax initiative specific to
public transit. Lastly, 16.4 percent of respondents can reasonably be termed “undecided.”
Exhibit 2.2.14 Support for Dedicated Transit Tax
Yes, no
hesitation
37.3%
Yes, if the
benefits to
transit were
very clearly
presented
13.1%
Maybe,
depends on the
purpose and/or
amount of the
tax
9.4%
No
33.3%
I don't know
7.0%
n = 502
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
52
Question 13: Would you support a Kitsap Transit fare increase to enhance service if the resulting funds
were used to enhance public transit in Kitsap County?
The phrasing of this question is unclear, making analysis of the associated data problematic. For
example, the term “enhance” is highly subjective. In one instance, it could refer to increased service
frequency, while in another it could mean “add Sunday service.” Second, the question included the
phrase “enhance public transit in Kitsap County.” We question whether or not the pool of respondents
actually differentiated between local fixed-route bus service and the much-discussed “fast ferry” linking
Bremerton and downtown Seattle.
In summary, 53.5 percent indicated some level of support for the potential fare increase, while 46.5
percent indicated no support. However, any consideration of a fare increase must also take into
account fare elasticity, which predicts a drop in ridership corresponding to any increase in fare. Given
the respondents cited herein are non-riders, rider tolerance for a fare increase is also an important
consideration.
Exhibit 2.2.15 Support for Kitsap Transit Fare Increase
Would support
fare increase,
53.5%
Would not
support fare
increase, 46.5%
n = 490
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
53
Question 13A: What level of fare increase would you support?
This question sought to identify a specific price-point for a potential fare increase. Survey participants
were provided four response options from which to choose. Of the 262 respondents to Question 13A,
253 provided responses to this follow-up question.
“Twenty-five cents” was the top-ranked choice (63.2 percent), followed by “fifty cents” (26.9 percent).
Exhibit 2.2.16 Level of Fare Increase Supported
25 cents
63.2%
50 cents
26.9%
75 cents
2.8%
One dollar
7.1%
n = 253
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
54
Question 14: Thinking of your typical weekly travel, what is your most common trip purpose?
Survey participants were provided with six response options as well as the generic “other.” The
response options also included “personal business,” which our experience has shown to be rather
unenlightening.
“Shopping” was the most common response (31.3 percent), followed by “work/commute” (27.9
percent) and “healthcare” (15.8 percent).
In general, telephone surveys tend to skew toward female and older adults (and this was borne out by
the Kitsap Transit survey). This likely explains why “work/commute” was not the most common trip
purpose, and why “healthcare” received such a great number of responses.
Exhibit 2.2.17 Trip Purpose
15.8%
27.9%
3.4%
31.3%
11.3%
6.7%
3.6%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Healthcare Work/
commute trip
School Shopping Personal
business
Recreation/
social
Other
n = 495
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
55
Question 15: How often do you make your most frequent trip?
Forty-four percent of respondents cited making their most frequent trip “three to five times/week,”
while an additional 39.6 percent chose “one to two times/week.”
Exhibit 2.2.18 Frequency of Most Common Trip
One or two
times per week
39.6%
3-5 times per
week
44.3%
6 or more time
per week
16.1%
n = 492
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
56
Question 16: How do you typically make that trip?
Not surprisingly, “drive self” was clear and away the top-ranked response (81.4 percent). The survey
failed to include a specific question regarding access to a personal vehicle. Quite interesting was the
selection of “ridesharing” by 12.3 percent. This subset of respondents could include “informal
ridesharing” (such as household members sharing a ride to the grocery store) versus more “formal
ridesharing” (such as an organized carpool of commuters).
Public transit (all forms) garnered 3.6 percent of total responses. This is a considerably higher mode-
share than found in many “like peer” communities. Some of this could be attributed to the “pool of
commuters” who rely on the Washington State Ferries’ service for travel beyond Kitsap County.
Exhibit 2.2.19 Mode of Most Common Trip
1.8% 0.6% 0.2%
81.4%
12.3%
1.0% 1.2% 1.4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Walk Bicycle Wheelchair or
scooter
Drive myself Ride with others
(carpool/vanpool)
Kitsap Transit
routed bus
Foot ferry Other public
transit service
n = 489
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
57
Question 17: Would you consider using public transit to complete that trip some of the time?
Interestingly, despite our assumption that the vast majority of respondents have access to a personal
vehicle (either owned or shared), only 15 percent indicated they would not (even) consider use of public
transit as a travel alternative. This aggregate show of support (i.e., combined “yes” and “maybe”
responses) is far greater than we have noted in communities of similar socio-demographics.
Exhibit 2.2.20 Consideration of Public Transit
Would consider
using public
transit
30.8%
May consider
using public
transit
54.2%
Would not
consider using
public transit
15.1%
n = 491
Two follow-up questions were posed: Are there any circumstances under which you would consider
using transit to complete that trip some of the time?, and How high would fuel prices need to rise (per
gallon) before you would consider using public transportation?
With respect to the first question, nearly 51 percent indicated “nothing” would motivate them to use
public transit (which we assume reflects primary reliance upon the personal vehicle). However, 33.5
percent indicated a “change in personal circumstance” would likely serve as a motivator. Our
experience conducting similar market research reveals the most likely “change” is either loss of a vehicle
or change in work/home location.
Of particular interest is the 12.5 percent of respondents who indicated they would begin riding public
transit if their preferred service improvement was addressed (see Question 7).
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
58
Exhibit 2.2.21 Motivator for Consideration of Public Transit
If my personal
circumstances
were to change
27.5%
If other options
were
unavailable
6.0%
If the cost of
fuel became
too high
3.3%
If service
improvements
were made
12.5%
Nothing would
get me to use
public transit
50.7%
n = 335
A rise in fuel costs was a (potential) motivator for only 3.3 percent of total respondents. Only 11 survey
participants identified a specific fuel price level at which transit would become an attractive option. At
the time of survey fielding, the price of a gallon of 87 octane fuel hovered around $3.63.
Exhibit 2.2.22 Fuel Cost Threshold for Consideration of Public Transit
$4.00, 9.1%
$4.50, 18.2%
$5.00, 36.4%
$5.50, 9.1%
$10.00, 27.3%
n = 11
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
59
Question 18: What are your most common methods of obtaining information and/or news regarding
public transit service?
While nearly 22 percent of respondents said they do not typically get public transit information, among
those that do, nearly 20 percent cited the Kitsap Transit website as their most common source. The
newspaper was the second most frequently cited source (15.3 percent), followed by printed materials
(such as brochures, system maps, and rider guides) (12.3 percent), and through friends or family (11
percent). The high incidence of newspaper suggests these respondents get news about public transit in
the same manner as they get other news, rather than seeking out transit information in the newspaper.
More than 34 percent consult Kitsap Transit resources directly for transit information.
Exhibit 2.2.23 Methods for Obtaining Public Transit News/Information
12.3%
3.0%
11.0%
0.9%
2.4%
15.3%
0.9%
19.2%
3.7%
1.7%
8.0%
21.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Printed
materials
Customer
service phone
number
Friends/family Employer Smartphone/
mobile app
Newspaper Radio Kitsap Transit
website
Other website Social media Other Don't typically
get public
transit
information
n = 464
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
60
Question 19: Are you registered to vote?
More than 80 percent of respondents indicated they were registered to vote. This is consistent with
Kitsap County as a whole, wherein approximately 77 percent of persons age 18 and older are registered
voters.
Exhibit 2.2.24 Incidence of Voter Registration
Registered to
vote
80.1%
Not registered
to vote
13.5%
Decline to state
6.4%
n = 512
Question 20: Did you vote in the last local/state/national election?
Survey participants cited a high level of participation in local, state, and national elections, which nearly
61 percent voting in local elections and higher percentages in state and national elections. By contrast,
only 28 percent of Kitsap County residents voted in the August 2013 primary election. The November 5,
2013 general election (which took place after the survey was conducted and included both local and
state measures/races) saw a voter turnout of nearly 46 percent.
Exhibit 2.2.25 Voting History
60.7%
67.0%
73.8%
22.3%
15.4%
9.2%
17.0% 17.6% 17.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Local election State election National election
Voted Did not vote Decline to state
n = 512
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
61
Question 21: What is your age?
As is typical with telephone surveys, the majority of respondents (55.5 percent) are age 56 or older. By
contrast, only approximately 27 percent of the total Kitsap County population falls within this age range.
Exhibit 2.2.26 Respondent Age
0.6%
2.0%
7.4%
8.6%
15.6%
24.6%
30.9%
10.4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Under 18 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 66 or
older
Decline
to state
n = 512
Question 22: How many people live in your household?
Most respondents reported living in households of three or fewer, including more than 30 percent who
lived alone, which translates to an average household size of 2.48. This is consistent with the average
household size reported by Census 2010, which is 2.49 individuals per household.
Exhibit 2.2.27 Household Size
30.5%
34.6%
13.1%
8.8%
5.1%
3.5%
1.4%
0.2% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4%
1.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 Decline
to
state
n = 489
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
62
Question 23: What is your annual household income?
Nearly half of respondents declined to state their annual household income. Of those who did,
responses were fairly evenly split between those with an income below $50,000 and those with an
income above $50,000. The mean annual household income for Kitsap County is just over $77,000,
according to the 2007-2011 American Community Survey.
Exhibit 2.2.28 Annual Household Income
9.6%
12.2%
29.3%
21.1%
13.0%
14.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Under $15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$49,999 $50,000-$74,999 $75,000-$100,000 Over $100,000
n = 270
Combined, household size and annual household income can be used to identify low-income
households, particularly those living at or below the poverty line. When these two datasets are
compared, only 28 respondents are at risk of living at or below federal poverty guidelines. However, it is
important to take into consideration the number of “decline to state” responses to both of these
questions.
Exhibit 2.2.29 Annual Household Income versus Household Size
12.1%
3.0% 1.6% 2.3%
14.3%
11.4%
4.1% 9.4%
2.3% 4.0%
14.3%
20.8%
12.4%
17.2%
14.0% 16.0% 23.5%
28.6%
6.7%
13.6%
15.6%
7.0% 8.0%
35.3%
28.6%
2.7% 100.0%
8.3%
7.8%
20.9%
4.0%
11.8%
2.7%
12.4%
7.8% 16.3%
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
63
Question 24: What is your gender?
As stated previously, telephone surveys typically result in an oversampling of females. This is true in this
survey as well. Kitsap County is split fairly evening, with males holding a slight majority (50.6 percent).
In contrast, females made up at least 60 percent of the sample (potentially higher due to the number of
individuals who declined to state their gender).
Exhibit 2.2.30 Respondent Gender
Male
34.6%
Female
60.0%
Decline to state
5.5%
n = 512
Question 25: What is your ethnicity?
A large majority (77.3 percent) identified themselves as white, while nearly 13 percent declined to state
their ethnicity.
Exhibit 2.2.31 Respondent Ethnicity
77.3%
1.8% 2.9% 2.3% 1.4% 1.4%
12.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
White Black Hispanic/Latino American
Indian/ Alaskan
Native
Asian/ Pacific
Islander
Other Decline to state
n = 512
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
64
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
65
Part 3
Appendices
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
66
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-1
Appendix A
Survey Instruments
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-2
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-3
Exhibit A.1 Onboard Origin and Destination Survey Instrument - English
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-4
Exhibit A.2 Follow-Up Telephone Survey Instrument
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-5
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-6
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-7
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-8
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-9
Exhibit A.3 Market Segmentation Survey Instrument
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-10
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-11
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-12
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-13
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
A-14
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-1
Appendix B
Simple Frequencies
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-2
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-3
ONBOARD ORIGIN & DESTINATION SURVEY
Q3. What is the route number or route name of this bus?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 106 2 0.1 0.1 0.1
11 119 8.1 8.1 8.2
11 & 17 4 0.3 0.3 8.5
11 & 25 2 0.1 0.1 8.6
11 & 32 1 0.1 0.1 8.7
12 83 5.6 5.6 14.3
13 89 6.0 6.0 20.4
15 2 0.1 0.1 20.5
17 66 4.5 4.5 25.0
17 & 24 & 11 & 12
& 26
1 0.1 0.1 25.1
19 1 0.1 0.1 25.1
20 17 1.2 1.2 26.3
21 6 0.4 0.4 26.7
22 1 0.1 0.1 26.7
23 1 0.1 0.1 26.8
24 20 1.4 1.4 28.2
24 & 32 1 0.1 0.1 28.2
25 53 3.6 3.6 31.8
26 13 0.9 0.9 32.7
29 6 0.4 0.4 33.1
32 74 5.0 5.0 38.2
32 & 24 1 0.1 0.1 38.2
33 29 2.0 2.0 40.2
33 & 90 1 0.1 0.1 40.3
34 61 4.1 4.1 44.4
34 & 11 2 0.1 0.1 44.5
35 4 0.3 0.3 44.8
36 2 0.1 0.1 44.9
37 15 1.0 1.0 46.0
4 102 6.9 6.9 52.9
41 28 1.9 1.9 54.8
43 28 1.9 1.9 56.7
44 4 0.3 0.3 57.0
5 110 7.5 7.5 64.4
5 & 8 1 0.1 0.1 64.5
77 1 0.1 0.1 64.6
8 70 4.8 4.8 69.3
8 & 9 2 0.1 0.1 69.5
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-4
81 1 0.1 0.1 69.5
85 12 0.8 0.8 70.3
86 15 1.0 1.0 71.4
9 37 2.5 2.5 73.9
9 & 81 1 0.1 0.1 73.9
9 & 86 1 0.1 0.1 74.0
90 208 14.1 14.1 88.1
90 & 33 1 0.1 0.1 88.2
90 & 43 & 32 1 0.1 0.1 88.3
91 80 5.4 5.4 93.7
92 16 1.1 1.1 94.8
93 1 0.1 0.1 94.8
94 5 0.3 0.3 95.2
97 71 4.8 4.8 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
Q4. Where did you come from last before catching this bus? (check one)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Home 724 49.2 49.9 49.9
Work 334 22.7 23.0 72.9
School (K-12) 32 2.2 2.2 75.1
College 81 5.5 5.6 80.6
Day care 1 0.1 0.1 80.7
Shopping/errand 80 5.4 5.5 86.2
Medical/dental visit 21 1.4 1.4 87.7
Social/recreational event 44 3.0 3.0 90.7
Other 135 9.2 9.3 100.0
Total 1,452 98.6 100.0
Missing System 21 1.4
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-5
Q6. How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus? (check one and fill in corresponding
blanks)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Walked ___ blocks 861 58.5 60.0 60.0
Drove or rode in a car to the bus stop 126 8.0 8.2 68.2
Drove or rode to a Park & Ride lot 58 3.9 4.0 72.2
Bicycled 40 2.7 2.8 75.0
Transferred from another bus 153 10.3 10.6 85.6
Rode a Washington State Ferry 149 10.1 10.4 96.0
Rode the Port Orchard/Bremerton
foot ferry
37 2.4 2.5 98.5
Other 12 1.5 1.5 100.0
Total 1,436 97.5 100.0
Missing System 37 2.5
Total 1,473 100.0
Q6A. How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus? – Distance walked (number of blocks)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 818 55.5 55.5 55.5
.25 3 0.2 0.2 55.7
.35 1 0.1 0.1 55.8
.5 30 2.0 2.0 57.8
0 28 1.9 1.9 59.7
0.5 4 0.3 0.3 60.0
1 191 13.0 13.0 73.0
1.5 2 0.1 0.1 73.1
10 24 1.6 1.6 74.7
11 4 0.3 0.3 75.0
12 4 0.3 0.3 75.3
13 1 0.1 0.1 75.4
15 4 0.3 0.3 75.6
18 2 0.1 0.1 75.8
19 1 0.1 0.1 75.8
2 127 8.6 8.6 84.5
2.5 1 0.1 0.1 84.5
20 2 0.1 0.1 84.7
24 2 0.1 0.1 84.8
26 1 0.1 0.1 84.9
3 79 5.4 5.4 90.2
30 2 0.1 0.1 90.4
35 2 0.1 0.1 90.5
4 43 2.9 2.9 93.4
5 37 2.5 2.5 95.9
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-6
6 28 1.9 1.9 97.8
7 13 0.9 0.9 98.7
8 9 0.6 0.6 99.3
9 10 0.7 0.7 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
Q6B. How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus? – Park & Ride Lot
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 6th & Montgomery 13 25.0 25.0 25.0
Agate Pass 1 1.9 1.9 26.9
Christ Memorial Church 1 1.9 1.9 28.8
Day Road 1 1.9 1.9 30.7
Downtown Port Orchard 1 1.9 1.9 32.6
Gateway Fellowship 3 5.8 5.8 38.4
George's Corners 7 13.5 13.5 51.9
North Kitsap Baptist Church 1 1.9 1.9 53.8
Port Orchard Armory 2 3.9 3.9 57.7
Port Orchard Ferry 2 3.9 3.9 61.6
Poulsbo Junction 4 7.7 7.7 69.3
Poulsbo Nazarene Church 4 7.7 7.7 77.0
Suquamish UCC 5 9.6 9.6 86.6
Walmart (Port Orchard) 1 1.9 1.9 88.5
Other 6 11.5 11.5 100.0
Total 52 100.00 100.00
Q6C. How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus? – Transfer from Another Bus
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Kitsap Transit 225 15.3 91.5 91.5
Jefferson Transit 5 0.3 2.0 93.5
Mason Transit 11 0.7 4.5 98.0
Pierce Transit 1
Kitsap Transit ACCESS 5 0.3 2.0 100.0
Total 247 16.7 100.0
Missing System 1,227 83.3
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-7
Q6D. How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus? – Kitsap Transit Route #
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 1 0.1 0.5 0.5
3 1 0.1 0.5 1.0
4 5 0.3 2.5 3.5
5 6 0.4 3.0 6.5
7 1 0.1 0.5 7.0
8 11 0.7 5.5 12.4
9 9 0.6 4.5 16.9
11 21 1.4 10.4 27.4
12 6 0.4 3.0 30.3
13 13 0.9 6.5 36.8
17 13 0.9 6.5 43.3
20 13 0.9 6.5 49.8
21 7 0.5 3.5 53.2
23 2 0.1 1.0 54.2
24 14 1.0 7.0 61.2
25 19 1.3 9.5 70.6
26 15 1.0 7.5 78.1
29 7 0.5 3.5 81.6
32 15 1.0 7.5 89.1
35 10 0.7 5.0 94.0
36 4 0.3 2.0 96.0
37 1 0.1 0.5 96.5
80 1 0.1 0.5 97.0
86 1 0.1 0.5 97.5
90 3 0.2 1.5 99.0
95 1 0.1 0.5 99.5
99 1 0.1 0.5 100.0
Total 201 13.6 100.0
Missing System 1,272 86.4
Total 1,473 100.0
Q6E. How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus? – Washington State Ferry
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Seattle/Bainbridge Island 145 9.8 72.9 72.9
Seattle/Bremerton 53 3.6 26.6 99.5
Kingston/Edmonds 1 0.1 0.5 100.0
Total 199 13.5 100.0
Missing System 1,274 86.5
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-8
Q6F. How did you get to the stop where you boarded the bus? – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1,467 99.6 99.6 99.6
Taxi 3 0.2 0.2 99.8
Wheelchair 3 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
Q7. Where are you going first after completing this trip? (check one)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Home 568 38.6 39.4 39.4
Work 279 18.9 19.4 58.8
School (K-12) 28 1.9 1.9 60.7
College 92 6.2 6.4 67.1
Day care 6 0.4 0.4 67.5
Shopping/errand 191 13.0 13.3 80.8
Medical/dental visit 41 2.8 2.8 83.6
Social/recreational event 73 5.0 5.1 88.7
Other 163 11.1 11.3 100.0
Total 1,441 97.8 100.0
Missing System 32 2.2
Total 1,473 100.0
Q9. How will you get from the bus stop to your final destination? (check one and fill in corresponding
blanks)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Walk ___ blocks 942 64.0 66.3 66.3
Drive or ride in a car 158 10.7 11.1 77.4
Bicycle 4 0.3 0.3 77.7
Transfer to another bus 207 14.1 14.6 92.3
Ride a Washington State Ferry 76 5.2 5.3 97.6
Ride the Port
Orchard/Bremerton foot ferry
19 1.3 1.3 98.9
Other 15 1.0 1.1 100.0
Total 1,421 96.5 100.0
Missing System 52 3.5
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-9
Q9A. How will you get from the bus stop to your final destination? – Distance walked (number of
blocks)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 818 55.5 55.5 55.5
0.0 30 2.0 2.0 58.2
0.1 2 0.1 0.1 58.4
0.3 6 0.4 0.4 58.8
.5 8 0.5 0.5 56.1
0.5 26 1.8 1.8 60.6
0.8 1 0.1 0.1 60.6
1.0 203 13.8 13.8 74.4
1.3 1 0.1 0.1 74.5
1.5 1 0.1 0.1 74.5
2.0 112 7.6 7.6 84.2
2.5 1 0.1 0.1 84.3
3.0 87 5.9 5.9 90.9
4.0 51 3.5 3.5 94.4
5.0 31 2.1 2.1 96.5
6.0 28 1.9 1.9 98.4
7.0 11 0.7 0.7 99.2
8.0 7 0.5 0.5 99.7
9.0 4 0.3 0.3 99.9
10.0 22 1.5 1.5 76.0
11.0 1 0.1 0.1 76.1
12.0 2 0.1 0.1 76.2
13.0 1 0.1 0.1 76.3
15.0 3 0.2 0.2 76.5
18.0 1 0.1 0.1 76.6
19.0 1 0.1 0.1 76.6
20.0 9 0.6 0.6 84.9
25.0 1 0.1 0.1 85.0
50.0 1 0.1 0.1 96.5
90.0 1 0.1 0.1 100.0
? 2 0.1 0.1 56.2
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-10
Q9B. How will you get from the bus stop to your final destination? – Transfer to Another Bus
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Kitsap Transit 248 16.8 94.3 94.3
Jefferson Transit 2 0.1 0.8 95.1
Mason Transit 4 0.3 1.5 96.6
Kitsap Transit ACCESS 9 0.6 3.4 100.0
Total 263 17.9 100.0
Missing System 1,210 82.1
Total 1,473 100.0
Q9C. How will you get from the bus stop to your final destination? – Kitsap Transit Route #
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1,235 83.8 83.8 83.8
? 3 0.2 0.2 84.0
1 3 0.2 0.2 84.2
3 1 0.1 0.1 93.2
4 11 0.7 0.7 95.8
5 8 0.5 0.5 96.5
8 17 1.2 1.2 98.0
9 13 0.9 0.9 99.6
10 1 0.1 0.1 84.3
11 48 3.3 3.3 87.6
12 7 0.5 0.5 88.1
13 25 1.7 1.7 89.7
17 5 0.3 0.3 90.1
20 7 0.5 0.5 90.6
21 5 0.3 0.3 90.9
23 1 0.1 0.1 91.0
24 7 0.5 0.5 91.4
25 7 0.5 0.5 91.9
26 6 0.4 0.4 92.3
29 12 0.8 0.8 93.1
32 10 0.7 0.7 93.9
35 3 0.2 0.2 94.1
36 1 0.1 0.1 94.2
37 13 0.9 0.9 95.0
41 2 0.1 0.1 95.9
43 1 0.1 0.1 96.0
66 1 0.1 0.1 96.6
70 1 0.1 0.1 96.7
81 1 0.1 0.1 98.0
84 1 0.1 0.1 98.1
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-11
86 9 0.6 0.6 98.7
90 4 0.3 0.3 99.9
91 1 0.1 0.1 99.9
92 1 0.1 0.1 100.0
774 2 0.1 0.1 96.8
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
Q9D. How will you get from the bus stop to your final destination? – Washington State Ferry
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Seattle/Bainbridge Island 81 5.5 64.8 64.8
Seattle/Bremerton 42 2.9 33.6 98.4
Kingston/Edmonds 2 0.1 1.6 100.0
Total 125 8.5 100.0
Missing System 1,348 91.5
Total 1,473 100.0
Q9E. How will you get from the bus stop to your final destination? – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1,470 99.8 99.8 99.8
Taxi 1 0.1 0.1 99.9
Wheelchair 2 0.1 0.1 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
Q10. How often do you typically ride Kitsap Transit?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Less than once a week 137 9.3 9.6 9.6
1-2 days each week 130 8.8 9.1 18.6
3-4 days each week 347 23.6 24.2 42.9
5 days each week 536 36.4 37.4 80.3
6-7 days each week 282 19.1 19.7 100.0
Total 1,432 97.2 100.0
Missing System 41 2.8
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-12
Q11. Please rate how satisfied you are with Kitsap Transit in the following areas. The higher the
number, the greater your satisfaction. (circle one number on each line) (1 = not satisfied; 7 = very
satisfied)
Transit Shelters Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 86 5.8 6.3 6.3
2 83 5.6 6.1 12.3
3 132 9.0 9.6 22.0
4 269 18.3 19.6 41.6
5 259 17.6 18.9 60.6
6 221 15.0 16.1 76.7
7 319 21.7 23.3 100.0
Total 1,369 92.9 100.0
Missing System 104 7.1
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency of Service Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 0 1 0.1 0.1 0.1
1 112 7.6 8.1 8.2
2 103 7.0 7.4 15.6
3 161 10.9 11.6 27.2
4 205 13.9 14.8 42.0
5 245 16.6 17.7 59.7
6 257 17.4 18.5 78.2
7 302 20.5 21.8 100.0
Total 1,386 94.1 100.0
Missing System 87 5.9
Total 1,473 100.0
Bus/Ferry
Connections Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 26 1.8 1.9 1.9
2 28 1.9 2.0 3.9
3 82 5.6 5.9 9.8
4 199 13.5 14.4 24.2
5 254 17.2 18.4 42.6
6 308 20.9 22.3 64.8
7 487 33.1 35.2 100.0
Total 1,384 94.0 100.0
Missing System 89 6.0
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-13
Clean Buses Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 17 1.2 1.2 1.2
2 22 1.5 1.6 2.8
3 55 3.7 4.0 6.8
4 147 10.0 10.6 17.4
5 261 17.7 18.8 36.2
6 395 26.8 28.5 64.6
7 491 33.3 35.4 100.0
Total 1,388 94.2 100.0
Missing System 85 5.8
Total 1,473 100.0
On-Time Performance Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 20 1.4 1.4 1.4
2 25 1.7 1.8 3.2
3 70 4.8 5.0 8.3
4 171 11.6 12.3 20.6
5 285 19.3 20.5 41.0
6 407 27.6 29.3 70.3
7 413 28.0 29.7 100.0
Total 1,391 94.4 100.0
Missing System 82 5.6
Total 1,473 100.0
Service Information
Availability Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 19 1.3 1.4 1.4
2 27 1.8 2.0 3.3
3 50 3.4 3.6 7.0
4 157 10.7 11.4 18.3
5 232 15.8 16.8 35.1
6 361 24.5 26.1 61.3
7 535 36.3 38.7 100.0
Total 1,381 93.8 100.0
Missing System 92 6.2
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-14
Driver Courtesy Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 16 1.1 1.1 1.1
2 21 1.4 1.5 2.6
3 38 2.6 2.7 5.4
4 115 7.8 8.2 13.6
5 196 13.3 14.0 27.6
6 354 24.0 25.3 52.9
7 660 44.8 47.1 100.0
Total 1,400 95.0 100.0
Missing System 73 5.0
Total 1,473 100.0
Q12. Please rate how important each of these Kitsap Transit service features is to you. The higher the
number, the more important it is to you. (circle one number on each line) (1 = not important; 7 = very
important)
Transit Shelters Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 91 6.2 6.6 6.6
2 38 2.6 2.8 9.4
3 82 5.6 6.0 15.3
4 200 13.6 14.5 29.9
5 226 15.3 16.4 46.3
6 215 14.6 15.6 62.0
7 523 35.5 38.0 100.0
Total 1,375 93.3 100.0
Missing System 98 6.7
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency of Service Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 13 0.9 0.9 0.9
2 5 0.3 0.4 1.3
3 14 1.0 1.0 2.3
4 73 5.0 5.3 7.6
5 160 10.9 11.6 19.2
6 295 20.0 21.4 40.6
7 820 55.7 59.4 100.0
Total 1,380 93.7 100.0
Missing System 93 6.3
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-15
Bus/Ferry
Connections Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 27 1.8 2.0 2.0
2 15 1.0 1.1 3.0
3 29 2.0 2.1 5.1
4 98 6.7 7.1 12.3
5 134 9.1 9.7 22.0
6 252 17.1 18.3 40.2
7 824 55.9 59.8 100.0
Total 1,379 93.6 100.0
Missing System 94 6.4
Total 1,473 100.0
Clean Buses Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 21 1.4 1.5 1.5
2 10 0.7 0.7 2.3
3 24 1.6 1.8 4.0
4 146 9.9 10.7 14.7
5 249 16.9 18.2 32.8
6 341 23.2 24.9 57.7
7 579 39.3 42.3 100.0
Total 1,370 93.0 100.0
Missing System 103 7.0
Total 1,473 100.0
On-Time Performance Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 11 0.7 0.8 0.8
2 1 0.1 0.1 0.9
3 12 0.8 0.9 1.7
4 55 3.7 4.0 5.7
5 102 6.9 7.4 13.2
6 275 18.7 20.0 33.2
7 918 62.3 66.8 100.0
Total 1,374 93.3 100.0
Missing System 99 6.7
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-16
Service Information
Availability Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 24 1.6 1.8 1.8
2 11 0.7 0.8 2.6
3 33 2.2 2.4 5.0
4 147 10.0 10.8 15.8
5 210 14.3 15.4 31.3
6 286 19.4 21.0 52.3
7 649 44.1 47.7 100.0
Total 1,360 92.3 100.0
Missing System 113 7.7
Total 1,473 100.0
Driver Courtesy Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 16 1.1 1.2 1.2
2 6 0.4 0.4 1.6
3 23 1.6 1.7 3.3
4 102 6.9 7.4 10.7
5 184 12.5 13.4 24.1
6 307 20.8 22.3 46.4
7 738 50.1 53.6 100.0
Total 1,376 93.4 100.0
Missing System 97 6.6
Total 1,473 100.0
Q13. Did you have a vehicle available that you could have used for this trip?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Yes 520 35.3 36.8 36.8
No 892 60.6 63.2 100.0
Total 1,412 95.9 100.0
Missing System 61 4.1
Total 1,473 100.0
Q14. Do you have a valid driver’s license?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Yes 810 55.0 57.2 57.2
No 607 41.2 42.8 100.0
Total 1,417 96.2 100.0
Missing System 56 3.8
Total 1,473 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-17
Q15. What is your approximate annual household income?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Less than $15,000 548 37.2 42.1 42.1
$15,000 to $34,999 179 12.2 13.8 55.9
$35,000 to $49,999 178 12.1 13.7 69.6
$50,000 to $74,999 129 8.8 9.9 79.5
$75,000 to $99,999 102 6.9 7.8 87.3
$100,000 to $149,999 118 8.0 9.1 96.4
$150,000 to $199,999 26 1.8 2.0 98.4
$200,000 or more 21 1.4 1.6 100.0
Total 1,301 88.3 100.0
Missing System 172 11.7
Total 1,473 100.0
Q16. Which age group are you in?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 12-15 years 23 1.6 1.6 1.6
16-18 years 96 6.5 6.8 8.4
19-24 years 210 14.3 14.8 23.3
25-34 years 286 19.4 20.2 43.5
35-44 years 225 15.3 15.9 59.4
45-54 years 244 16.6 17.2 76.6
55-59 years 139 9.4 9.8 86.4
60-64 years 105 7.1 7.4 93.9
65+ years 87 5.9 6.1 100.0
Total 1,415 96.1 100.0
Missing System 58 3.9
Total 1,473 100.0
Q17. Which of the following best describes your ethnic background?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Asian/Pacific Islander 86 5.8 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,387 94.2
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid African-American 102 6.9 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,371 93.1
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-18
Valid Hispanic/Latino 76 5.2 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,397 94.8
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Native American/Alaskan
Native
79 5.4 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,394 94.6
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Caucasian 1,017 69.0 100.0 100.0
Missing System 456 31.0
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Other 85 5.8 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,388 94.2
Total 1,473 100.0
Q17A. Which of the following best describes your ethnic background? – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1,430 97.1 97.1 97.1
AMERICAN 11 0.7 0.7 97.8
ASIAN/ CAUCASIAN 1 0.1 0.1 97.9
BLACK 1 0.1 0.1 98.0
BLACK, WHITE, INDIAN 1 0.1 0.1 98.0
CHINESE 1 0.1 0.1 98.1
EUROPEAN 1 0.1 0.1 98.3
HEBREW 2 0.1 0.1 98.4
HONG KONG CHINESE 1 0.1 0.1 98.5
DECLINED TO ANSWER 5 0.3 0.3 98.6
IRANIAN & ITALIAN 1 0.1 0.1 98.6
MIXED RACE 12 0.8 0.8 99.5
NORWEGIAN AMERICAN 1 0.1 0.1 99.5
PAKISTANI/AMERICAN 1 0.1 0.1 99.6
RUSSIAN 1 0.1 0.1 99.7
WEST INDIAN 1 0.1 0.1 99.9
WHITE 2 0.1 0.1 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-19
Q18. What languages are spoken in your home? (select all that apply)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid English 1,387 94.2 100.0 100.0
Missing System 86 5.8
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Spanish 76 5.2 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,397 94.8
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Tagalog 33 2.2 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,440 97.8
Total 1,473 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Other 58 3.9 100.0 100.0
Missing System 1,415 96.1
Total 1,473 100.0
Q18A. What languages are spoken in your home? (select all that apply) – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1,430 97.1 97.1 97.1
ARABIC 4 0.3 0.3 97.4
ARMENIAN/POLISH/GERMAN 1 0.1 0.1 97.4
ASL 7 0.5 0.5 97.9
CAMBODIAN 1 0.1 0.1 98.0
CHAMORRO 2 0.1 0.1 98.1
CHINESE 6 0.4 0.4 98.5
EBONIC 1 0.1 0.1 98.6
FRENCH 6 0.4 0.4 99.0
GERMAN 3 0.2 0.2 99.2
HAWAIIAN 1 0.1 0.1 99.3
HUNGARIAN 2 0.1 0.1 99.4
ITALIAN 1 0.1 0.1 99.5
JAPANESE 3 0.2 0.2 99.7
LATIN 1 0.1 0.1 99.7
NEPALESE 2 0.1 0.1 99.9
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-20
SIBERIAN 1 0.1 0.1 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
Q19. What is your home ZIP code?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 156 10.6 10.6 10.6
35016 1 0.1 0.1 10.7
75984 1 0.1 0.1 10.7
76084 1 0.1 0.1 10.8
83815 1 0.1 0.1 10.9
83833 1 0.1 0.1 10.9
85646 1 0.1 0.1 11.0
91342 1 0.1 0.1 11.1
92810 1 0.1 0.1 11.1
93311 1 0.1 0.1 11.2
93846 1 0.1 0.1 11.3
95312 1 0.1 0.1 11.3
95364 1 0.1 0.1 11.4
95366 1 0.1 0.1 11.5
96528 1 0.1 0.1 11.5
96744 1 0.1 0.1 11.6
97366 2 0.1 0.1 11.7
97368 1 0.1 0.1 11.8
98005 1 0.1 0.1 11.9
98006 2 0.1 0.1 12.0
98007 1 0.1 0.1 12.1
98011 1 0.1 0.1 12.2
98031 1 0.1 0.1 12.2
98037 1 0.1 0.1 12.3
98102 1 0.1 0.1 12.4
98103 3 0.2 0.2 12.6
98104 1 0.1 0.1 12.6
98105 1 0.1 0.1 12.7
98107 1 0.1 0.1 12.8
98109 2 0.1 0.1 12.9
98110 117 7.9 7.9 20.8
98115 2 0.1 0.1 21.0
98117 1 0.1 0.1 21.0
98118 1 0.1 0.1 21.1
98121 1 0.1 0.1 21.2
98122 1 0.1 0.1 21.2
98133 1 0.1 0.1 21.3
98134 2 0.1 0.1 21.5
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-21
98146 1 0.1 0.1 21.5
98190 1 0.1 0.1 21.6
98258 1 0.1 0.1 21.7
98273 1 0.1 0.1 21.7
98307 2 0.1 0.1 21.9
98310 144 9.8 9.8 31.6
98311 78 5.3 5.3 36.9
98312 188 12.8 12.8 49.7
98313 2 0.1 0.1 49.8
98314 1 0.1 0.1 49.9
98315 5 0.3 0.3 50.2
98316 3 0.2 0.2 50.4
98317 1 0.1 0.1 50.5
98318 1 0.1 0.1 50.6
98320 1 0.1 0.1 50.6
98325 2 0.1 0.1 50.8
98331 2 0.1 0.1 50.9
98332 1 0.1 0.1 51.0
98333 1 0.1 0.1 51.1
98335 3 0.2 0.2 51.3
98337 94 6.4 6.4 57.6
98340 2 0.1 0.1 57.8
98342 10 0.7 0.7 58.5
98344 1 0.1 0.1 58.5
98345 1 0.1 0.1 58.6
98346 26 1.8 1.8 60.4
98351 1 0.1 0.1 60.4
98359 2 0.1 0.1 60.6
98360 2 0.1 0.1 60.7
98364 1 0.1 0.1 60.8
98365 5 0.3 0.3 61.1
98366 236 16.0 16.0 77.1
98367 47 3.2 3.2 80.3
98368 4 0.3 0.3 80.6
98370 163 11.1 11.1 91.6
98376 2 0.1 0.1 91.8
98377 7 0.5 0.5 92.3
98378 1 0.1 0.1 92.3
98380 2 0.1 0.1 92.5
98382 1 0.1 0.1 92.5
98383 57 3.9 3.9 96.4
98384 1 0.1 0.1 96.5
98392 25 1.7 1.7 98.2
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-22
98402 1 0.1 0.1 98.2
98418 1 0.1 0.1 98.3
98510 2 0.1 0.1 98.4
98518 1 0.1 0.1 98.5
98528 4 0.3 0.3 98.8
98563 2 0.1 0.1 98.9
98584 4 0.3 0.3 99.2
98605 1 0.1 0.1 99.3
98632 1 0.1 0.1 99.3
98637 1 0.1 0.1 99.4
98737 1 0.1 0.1 99.5
98766 1 0.1 0.1 99.5
98802 4 0.3 0.3 99.8
98811 1 0.1 0.1 99.9
98812 1 0.1 0.1 99.9
99207 1 0.1 0.1 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
Q20. What is your gender?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Male 776 52.7 55.3 55.3
Female 628 42.6 44.7 100.0
Total 1,404 95.3 100.0
Missing System 69 4.7
Total 1,473 100.0
Q21. Would you be interested in participating in a short follow-up telephone survey to discuss your
transit needs?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Yes 460 31.2 31.2 31.2
No 1,013 68.8 68.8 100.0
Total 1,473 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-23
FOLLOW-UP TELEPHONE SURVEY
Q1. What is the primary reason you choose to ride Kitsap Transit?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Cost 36 14.3 14.3 14.3
Proximity to my destination 9 3.6 3.6 17.9
Lack of access to a personal vehicle
38 15.1 15.1 33.1
Avoid traffic/parking 16 6.3 6.4 39.4
Sustainability/ "going green" 7 2.8 2.8 42.2
Unable to drive 33 13.1 13.1 55.4
Prefer to use public transit 26 10.3 10.4 65.7
Do not own a car 85 33.7 33.9 99.6
Other - Distance 1 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Q2. How long have you be a Kitsap Transit rider?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Less than 1 year 48 19.0 19.1 19.1
1-2 years 45 17.9 17.9 37.1
2-5 years 45 17.9 17.9 55.0
5-10 years 39 15.5 15.5 70.5
10 years or more 74 29.4 29.5 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Q3. How would you travel if Kitsap Transit were not available?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Drive my own vehicle 55 21.8 21.9 21.9
Ride a bicycle 23 9.1 9.2 31.1
Ride with a friend or family member 52 20.6 20.7 51.8
Walk 67 26.6 26.7 78.5
Take a taxi 16 6.3 6.4 84.9
Wouldn't make the trip 32 12.7 12.7 97.6
Other 5 2.0 2.0 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-24
Q4. How do you typically pay for your trip on Kitsap Transit?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Cash fare (single ride) 55 21.8 21.9 21.9
Kitsap Transit monthly pass 30 11.9 12.0 33.9
U-Pass 9 3.6 3.6 37.5
ORCA card e-purse 155 61.5 61.8 99.2
Other 2 0.8 0.8 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Q4Other. How do you typically pay for your trip on Kitsap Transit? – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 250 99.2 99.2 99.2
CATHOLIC SERVICES 1 0.4 0.4 99.6
REDUCED COST CARD 1 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total 252 100.0 100.0
Q5. Which fare category typically applies to you?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Regular fare 142 56.3 56.8 56.8
Discounted fare 108 42.9 43.2 100.0
Total 250 99.2 100.0
Missing System 2 0.8
Total 252 100.0
Q6. How do you typically obtain information about Kitsap Transit services?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Online 107 42.5 42.6 42.6
Cell phone/ mobile device 22 8.7 8.8 51.4
Printed materials 39 15.5 15.5 66.9
Call center 21 8.3 8.4 75.3
School 1 0.4 0.4 75.7
From the driver 17 6.7 6.8 82.5
On the bus 28 11.1 11.2 93.6
No response 1 0.4 0.4 94.0
Other (specify) 15 6.0 6.0 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-25
Q6Other. How do you typically obtain information about Kitsap Transit services? – Other
(specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 237 94.0 94.0 94.0
CALL CENTER/FROM DRIVER 1 0.4 0.4 94.4
FERRY TERMINAL 1 0.4 0.4 94.8
KIOSK AT TRANSIT CENTER 1 0.4 0.4 95.2
ONLINE/CALL CENTER 1 0.4 0.4 95.6
ONLINE/CELL PHONE 1 0.4 0.4 96.0
ONLINE/CELL PHONE/CALL CENTER 1 0.4 0.4 96.4
ONLINE/FROM THE DRIVER 2 0.8 0.8 97.2
ONLINE/ON THE BUS/ON THE PHONE 1 0.4 0.4 97.6
ONLINE/PRINT 1 0.4 0.4 98.0
PARK AND RIDE BULLETIN BOARD 1 0.4 0.4 98.4
PRINT 1 0.4 0.4 98.8
PRINT/FROM DRIVER/ON THE BUS 1 0.4 0.4 99.2
PRINT/ONLINE/ON THE BUS 1 0.4 0.4 99.6
SALVATION ARMY 1 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total 252 100.0 100.0
Q7. On a scale of one to seven (where one equals "not satisfied" and seven equals "very
satisfied"), please state your level of satisfaction with the following service attributes.
Hours of Operation Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 13 5.2 5.2 5.2
2 10 4.0 4.0 9.2
3 22 8.7 8.8 17.9
4 32 12.7 12.7 30.7
5 62 24.6 24.7 55.4
6 39 15.5 15.5 70.9
7 73 29.0 29.1 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-26
Travel Time Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 4 1.6 1.6 1.6
2 5 2.0 2.0 3.6
3 12 4.8 4.8 8.4
4 16 6.3 6.4 14.7
5 45 17.9 17.9 32.7
6 71 28.2 28.3 61.0
7 98 38.9 39.0 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Comfort Onboard
Vehicle Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 2 5 2.0 2.0 2.0
3 4 1.6 1.6 3.6
4 14 5.6 5.6 9.2
5 33 13.1 13.1 22.3
6 71 28.2 28.3 50.6
7 124 49.2 49.4 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Comfort at Bus Stops Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 3 1.2 1.2 1.2
2 10 4.0 4.0 5.2
3 23 9.1 9.2 14.4
4 35 13.9 14.0 28.4
5 64 25.4 25.6 54.0
6 46 18.3 18.4 72.4
7 69 27.4 27.6 100.0
Total 250 99.2 100.0
Missing System 2 0.8
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-27
Safety Onboard
Vehicle Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 3 3 1.2 1.2 1.2
4 12 4.8 4.8 6.0
5 25 9.9 10.0 15.9
6 56 22.2 22.3 38.2
7 155 61.5 61.8 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Safety at Bus Stops Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4
2 3 1.2 1.2 1.6
3 15 6.0 6.0 7.6
4 20 7.9 8.0 15.6
5 52 20.6 20.8 36.4
6 55 21.8 22.0 58.4
7 104 41.3 41.6 100.0
Total 250 99.2 100.0
Missing System 2 0.8
Total 252 100.0
Fare or Cost Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 5 2.0 2.0 2.0
2 6 2.4 2.4 4.4
3 12 4.8 4.8 9.2
4 16 6.3 6.4 15.5
5 53 21.0 21.1 36.7
6 58 23.0 23.1 59.8
7 101 40.1 40.2 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-28
Reliability of Service Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 4 1.6 1.6 1.6
2 3 1.2 1.2 2.8
3 7 2.8 2.8 5.6
4 20 7.9 8.0 13.5
5 34 13.5 13.5 27.1
6 66 26.2 26.3 53.4
7 117 46.4 46.6 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Accessibility of Service Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 1 0.4 0.4 0.4
2 3 1.2 1.2 1.6
3 13 5.2 5.2 6.9
4 13 5.2 5.2 12.1
5 46 18.3 18.5 30.6
6 58 23.0 23.4 54.0
7 114 45.2 46.0 100.0
Total 248 98.4 100.0
Missing System 4 1.6
Total 252 100.0
Customer Service Call
Center Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 4 1.6 1.6 1.6
2 2 0.8 0.8 2.4
3 6 2.4 2.4 4.9
4 12 4.8 4.9 9.8
5 22 8.7 9.0 18.8
6 61 24.2 24.9 43.7
7 138 54.8 56.3 100.0
Total 245 97.2 100.0
Missing System 7 2.8
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-29
Overall Satisfaction Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1 2 0.8 0.8 0.8
2 3 1.2 1.2 2.0
3 1 0.4 0.4 2.4
4 12 4.8 4.8 7.2
5 50 19.8 20.1 27.3
6 84 33.3 33.7 61.0
7 97 38.5 39.0 100.0
Total 249 98.8 100.0
Missing System 3 1.2
Total 252 100.0
Q8. How important is cost in making your decision to ride Kitsap Transit?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Important 144 57.1 57.4 57.4
Not important 13 5.2 5.2 62.5
Neutral/no opinion 94 37.3 37.5 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Q9. How much more would you be willing to pay per trip for more transit service?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 25 cents more 53 21.0 21.1 21.1
50 cents more 81 32.1 32.3 53.4
75 cents more 24 9.5 9.6 62.9
Would not be willing to pay more 59 23.4 23.5 86.5
Prefer to pay less for the current service 34 13.5 13.5 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-30
Q10. What potential service improvement is most important to you?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid More frequent service 35 13.9 14.0 14.0
More weekend service 60 23.8 24.0 38.0
Improved transfer centers 3 1.2 1.2 39.2
Later operating/ service hours 38 15.1 15.2 54.4
Earlier operating/ service hours 9 3.6 3.6 58.0
Sunday service 70 27.8 28.0 86.0
Other (specify) 35 13.9 14.0 100.0
Total 250 99.2 100.0
Missing System 2 0.8
Total 252 100.0
Q10Other. What potential service improvement is most important to you? – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 218 86.5 86.5 86.5
ALL ARE IMPORTANT 2 0.8 0.8 87.3
ALL OPTIONS AND SUNDAY SERVICE 2 0.8 0.8 88.1
BUSES GO AS LATE AS THE FERRIES 1 0.4 0.4 88.5
GET OFF THE ISLAND FASTER 2 0.8 0.8 89.3
IMPROVED ROUTES AND MORE COVERAGE 1 0.4 0.4 89.7
IMPROVED TRANSFER CENTER AND SUNDAY SERVICE
1 0.4 0.4 90.1
LATER HOURS AND SUNDAY SERVICE 4 1.6 1.6 91.7
LATER OPERATING HOURS AND SUNDAY SERVICE
3 1.2 1.2 92.9
MORE BUS/BIKE ROUTES 1 0.4 0.4 93.3
MORE EXPRESS BUSES AND MORE FROM BAINBRIDGE
TERMINAL
1 0.4 0.4 93.7
MORE FREQUENT AND SUNDAY SERVICE 1 0.4 0.4 94.0
MORE FREQUENT HOURS AND SUNDAY SERVICE
1 0.4 0.4 94.4
MORE FREQUENT SERVICE AND SUNDAY SERVICE
4 1.6 1.6 96.0
MORE SPACE ON THE BUS 1 0.4 0.4 96.4
MORE WEEKEND AND EARLIER OPERATING HOURS
1 0.4 0.4 96.8
MORE WEEKEND AND LATER HOURS 1 0.4 0.4 97.2
MORE WEEKEND AND SUNDAY SERVICE 2 0.8 0.8 98.0
MORE WEEKEND SERVICE AND SUNDAY SERVICE
1 0.4 0.4 98.4
NONE 2 0.8 0.8 99.2
SUNDAY SERVICE AND LATER OPERATING HOURS
2 0.8 0.8 100.0
Total 252 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-31
Q11. Would you support the introduction of a fast passenger-only ferry between Kitsap
County and Seattle?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Yes 222 88.1 88.4 88.4
No 29 11.5 11.6 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Q12. How much would you be willing to pay for a one-way fast passenger-only ferry to
Seattle?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 70 27.8 27.8 27.8
$0.00 4 1.6 1.6 29.4
$0.75 1 0.4 0.4 29.8
$1.00 1 0.4 0.4 30.2
$1.75 1 0.4 0.4 30.6
$10.00 13 5.2 5.2 35.7
$2.00 12 4.8 4.8 40.5
$2.50 6 2.4 2.4 42.9
$3.00 12 4.8 4.8 47.6
$3.25 1 0.4 0.4 48.0
$3.50 12 4.8 4.8 52.8
$4.00 15 6.0 6.0 58.7
$5.00 50 19.8 19.8 78.6
$5.50 1 0.4 0.4 79.0
$5.75 1 0.4 0.4 79.4
$6.00 2 0.8 0.8 80.2
$6.10 1 0.4 0.4 80.6
$6.50 1 0.4 0.4 81.0
$7.00 19 7.5 7.5 88.5
$7.25 1 0.4 0.4 88.9
$7.30 1 0.4 0.4 89.3
$7.50 8 3.2 3.2 92.5
$7.70 2 0.8 0.8 93.3
$8.00 14 5.6 5.6 98.8
$8.25 1 0.4 0.4 99.2
$9.00 1 0.4 0.4 99.6
$9.50 1 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total 252 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-32
Q13. Are there any additional comments you would like to add about how Kitsap Transit
could improve its service?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Yes (specify) 116 46.0 46.2 46.2
No 135 53.6 53.8 100.0
Total 251 99.6 100.0
Missing System 1 0.4
Total 252 100.0
Q13Specify. Are there any additional comments you would like to add about how Kitsap
Transit could improve its service? – Yes (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 138 54.8 54.8 54.8
#11,9,are way too overcrowded. Sunday service is
important. 1 0.4 0.4 55.2
Announce next stops 1 0.4 0.4 55.6
At bus depot, adding additional benches or covers. Knowing
the exact time each bus wil be at a stop. Sunday service,
extending hours on weekends.
1 0.4 0.4 56.0
Bainbridge - leave on time 1 0.4 0.4 56.3
Bathroom at westside and eastside park and ride. 1 0.4 0.4 56.7
Benches at bus stops 1 0.4 0.4 57.1
Better communication between drivers, esp. female drivers -
they need anger management classes. Covers/shelters at
bus stops, additional routes, Sunday service, longer hours in
the evening.
1 0.4 0.4 57.5
Better attitude from drivers, not very friendly. 1 0.4 0.4 57.9
Better cell phone app. Check out Metro Transit one bus
away app to track bus schedule.
1 0.4 0.4 58.3
Better lighting at the park and rides. Drivers are very friendly
and professional and courteous. The line up for the buses
does not make sense, some buses get blocked in and can't
move.
1 0.4 0.4 58.7
Better shelter on stops, esp. 305 highway, bus not visible
from stop. Indianola Road route need to have more service.
Appreciate that bus tries to connect with ferry when ferry is
running late for arrival.
1 0.4 0.4 59.1
Bicycle friendly drivers on bicycle-heavy routes. 1 0.4 0.4 59.5
Bigger buses 1 0.4 0.4 59.9
Bus driver #11 very friendly and courteous. 2 0.8 0.8 60.7
Bus drivers need to be more friendly, some don't greet you
when getting on or off the bus.
1 0.4 0.4 61.1
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-33
Bus stops cleaned up 1 0.4 0.4 61.9
Call center (Access) sensitivity training 1 0.4 0.4 62.3
Child safety needs improvement. More seating or more
buses on busier routes, especially near college campus. No
room for stroller parking, like they have for bicycles. Earlier
hours, Sunday service, extended service hours in the
evening.
1 0.4 0.4 62.7
Communication with customers when the buses are not
running. 1 0.4 0.4 63.1
Connection between Kingston Park and Ride and Kingston
ferry does not coincide with schedule. More focus on
Kingston commuters to Seattle.
2 0.8 0.8 63.9
Covered stops on highway. Later weekend service,
extending hours on weekend. 1 0.4 0.4 64.3
Driver are very friendly. Keep hiring nice drivers. 1 0.4 0.4 64.7
Driver attitude need to be better. Sunday service.
Covers/shelter at bus stop. Cleaner bus stops. 1 0.4 0.4 65.1
Driver needs to be more courteous. 1 0.4 0.4 65.5
Drivers are friendly but "out of service" bus drivers should
have discretion about picking up passengers during
miserable conditions.
1 0.4 0.4 65.9
Drivers be more educated about operating buses. Climate in
back of bus. No need to kneel bus on raised sidewalk. 1 0.4 0.4 66.3
Drivers need to understand the importance of service
animals, understanding the needs of disabled passengers.
Wants Sunday Service.
2 0.8 0.8 67.1
Earlier hours to satisfy student and handicapped needs. 1 0.4 0.4 67.5
Earlier runs on Saturday beginning at 7 or 8 am. 1 0.4 0.4 67.9
Expand service especially in North Kitsap, especially route
91. 1 0.4 0.4 68.3
Expand weekend hours; add Sunday service. 1 0.4 0.4 68.7
Extended hours on Saturday. 1 0.4 0.4 69.0
Extended hours until 10:00 pm. 2 0.8 0.8 69.8
Extended hours, weekend service. Better training at call
center to read maps to communicate better info. Sunday
Service.
1 0.4 0.4 70.2
Extended services on weekend and weekday. Adding Sunday
service. 1 0.4 0.4 70.6
Extending hours in the evening to around 10 pm. Weekend
earlier hours. Adding Sunday Service. 1 0.4 0.4 71.0
Extending hours, weekend service, cleaner buses i.e.
upholstery. 1 0.4 0.4 71.4
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-34
Extending operating hours (earlier and later) on weekend
and weekdays. 1 0.4 0.4 71.8
Extending the hours on weekends, Sunday Service. 1 0.4 0.4 72.2
Faster communication about changes before
implementation. Sunday Service. Longer hours/extended
before the holidays (eve of).
1 0.4 0.4 72.6
Ferry should originate from Poulsbo. 1 0.4 0.4 73.0
Frequency of routes and having more bus stops in between
stops, they are too far apart. 1 0.4 0.4 73.4
Get a fast ferry from Seattle to Bremerton. 1 0.4 0.4 73.8
Have a separate bus lane especially during traffic peak
times. Better/efficient system to get commuters off the
island.
2 0.8 0.8 74.6
Have seats and cover shelters at all stops. 1 0.4 0.4 75.0
Hour between buses is too long. 1 0.4 0.4 75.4
In the winter when it snows the park and ride lots should be
sanded for safety.
1 0.4 0.4 75.8
Less breakdown, 130 ferry to Seattle, better communication
when it happens.
1 0.4 0.4 76.2
Lights at bus stops 1 0.4 0.4 76.6
Longer hours 1 0.4 0.4 77.0
Longer hours on weekdays and weekends. 1 0.4 0.4 77.4
Longer weekend hours 1 0.4 0.4 77.8
Mid-afternoon buses don’t line up with the ferry schedule
well. Some buses get to the terminal too early. 1 0.4 0.4 78.2
More 770 buses.
1 0.4 0.4 78.6
More bus stops closer together, preferably across the street
from each other, especially Highway 305. 1 0.4 0.4 79.0
More consistent use of PA system by drivers for new drivers.
1 0.4 0.4 79.4
More frequent buses. Reduce the waiting time between
transfers. 1 0.4 0.4 79.8
More frequent stops at OC Bremerton. 2 0.8 0.8 80.6
More hours 1 0.4 0.4 81.0
More routes 1 0.4 0.4 81.3
More runs on busier routes. Sunday Service 1 0.4 0.4 81.7
More vanpools at various hours. Extend the hours to 10:00
pm. Weekend service extended. 2 0.8 0.8 82.5
Need service to Gig Harbor and also down to Bremerton. 1 0.4 0.4 82.9
No smoking sign 1 0.4 0.4 83.3
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-35
Online mapping to/from travel locations not complete; need
to be more comprehensive. More bus shelters. Later
operating hours esp. on weekends
1 0.4 0.4 83.7
Out of service buses to pick people up in bad weather 1 0.4 0.4 84.1
Planters in Bainbridge need to be managed 1 0.4 0.4 84.5
Port Orchard ferry later - until midnight 1 0.4 0.4 84.9
Rude drivers
1 0.4 0.4 85.3
Run on Sundays 1 0.4 0.4 85.7
Seats at stops 1 0.4 0.4 86.1
Shelters on most or all of the bus stops. Earlier service for
the morning ferry. 1 0.4 0.4 86.5
Shipyard times is too crowded 1 0.4 0.4 86.9
Some drivers need to be more friendly, Line 97 (Wes) drives
very aggressive around bicycles. 1 0.4 0.4 87.3
Some drivers are rude
1 0.4 0.4 87.7
Student discounts 1 0.4 0.4 88.1
Sunday service 3 1.2 1.2 89.3
Sunday service and extend weekend hours. 1 0.4 0.4 89.7
Sunday Service is needed. 1 0.4 0.4 90.1
Sunday service is really needed. Bus to Lake Helena or
Sydney to Glenwood and then back would be a big help.
Worker bus should allow non workers access through Navy
yard.
1 0.4 0.4 90.5
Sunday service needs to be added 1 0.4 0.4 90.9
Sunday service otherwise very happy with service 1 0.4 0.4 91.3
Sunday service to be able to attend church services. 2 0.8 0.8 92.1
Sunday service, earlier starting hours
1 0.4 0.4 92.5
Sunday service, extended hours. Cleanliness on buses. 1 0.4 0.4 92.9
Sunday service. 1 0.4 0.4 93.3
Sunday Service. 1 0.4 0.4 93.7
Sunday Service. Appreciates the service very much. 1 0.4 0.4 94.0
Sunday Service. Expanded service on weekend. Longer
hours. 1 0.4 0.4 94.4
Sunday service. Extended hours on the weekend to at least
9:00 pm. Conversations between bus drivers should have
more discretion about topics that can be overheard.
1 0.4 0.4 94.8
Sunday service. Extending weekend hours. 1 0.4 0.4 95.2
Sunday Service. Extending hours. Foot Ferry to Seattle 1 0.4 0.4 95.6
Sunday service. Improved depot/bench covers 1 0.4 0.4 96.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-36
Sunday Service. More covered shelters, especially Silverdale
and also more bus stops in Silverdale. Need seats at the bus
stops.
1 0.4 0.4 96.4
Sunday services. Buses need to be cleaner. 1 0.4 0.4 96.8
Update website 1 0.4 0.4 97.2
Very reliable. Friendly drivers 1 0.4 0.4 97.6
Veterans Day buses, day after Thanksgiving 1 0.4 0.4 98.0
Weather shelters at stops 1 0.4 0.4 98.4
Weekend extended service. Sunday Service. 1 0.4 0.4 98.8
Weekend service hours expansion. Bus shelters in Silverdale
and Bremerton. 1 0.4 0.4 99.2
Weekend service; Sunday service for Bible study 1 0.4 0.4 99.6
Weekend, bus stop needs benches. Very nice drivers 1 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total 252 100.0 100.0
Q14. Are you a student?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Yes 61 24.2 27.0 27.0
No 165 65.5 73.0 100.0
Total 226 89.7 100.0
Missing System 26 10.3
Total 252 100.0
Q14A. Are you a full-time or part-time student?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Full-time student 48 19.0 78.7 78.7
Part-time student 13 5.2 21.3 100.0
Total 61 24.2 100.0
Missing System 191 75.8
Total 252 100.0
Q14B. What school do you attend?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid University of Washington 2 0.8 3.6 3.6
Olympic College - Poulsbo 2 0.8 3.6 7.3
Olympic College - Bremerton 33 12.3 56.4 63.6
Other 18 7.9 36.4 100.0
Total 55 21.8 100.0
Missing System 197 78.2
Total 252 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-37
Q14BOther. What school do you attend? – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 229 90.9 90.9 90.9
Antioch University 1 0.4 0.4 91.3
Argosy University 1 0.4 0.4 91.7
The Art Institute of Seattle 2 0.8 0.8 92.5
Brandman University 2 0.8 0.8 93.3
Charter College 1 0.4 0.4 93.7
College 1 0.4 0.4 94.0
Everest College 1 0.4 0.4 94.4
Gonzaga University 1 0.4 0.4 94.8
High school 1 0.4 0.4 95.2
ITT Technical Institute 1 0.4 0.4 95.6
Renaissance High School 4 1.6 1.6 98.0
Seattle Central Community
College
2 0.8 0.8 98.8
Washington State University 2 0.8 0.8 99.2
University of Phoenix 1 0.4 0.4 99.6
Total 252 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-38
MARKET SEGMENTATION STUDY
Screener Questions
A. Are you 16 years of age or older?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Yes 512 100.0 100.0 100.0
B. What is your home ZIP code?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 98110 63 12.3 12.3 12.3
98311 56 10.9 10.9 23.2
98312 102 19.9 19.9 43.2
98315 4 0.8 0.8 43.9
98340 10 2.0 2.0 45.9
98346 24 4.7 4.7 50.6
98359 5 1.0 1.0 51.6
98366 75 14.6 14.6 66.2
98367 60 11.7 11.7 77.9
98370 66 12.9 12.9 90.8
98380 19 3.7 3.7 94.5
98383 28 5.5 5.5 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
C. Have you used any of the following Kitsap Transit services in the last 90 days? (select all
that apply)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid I HAVE NOT USED ANY KITSAP TRANSIT SERVICE 507 99.0 99.0 99.0
FIXED-ROUTE BUS (CONCLUDE SURVEY) 1 0.2 0.2 99.2
FOOT FERRIES (CONCLUDE SURVEY) 4 0.8 0.8 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Survey Questions
Q1. Are you aware of any public transportation systems in your region?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 507 99.0 100.0 100.0
Missing System 5 1.0
Total 512 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-39
Q1A. Are you aware of any public transportation systems in your region? (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid KING COUNTY METRO (AKA METRO) 176 34.4 51.8 51.8
SOUND TRANSIT 17 3.3 5.0 56.8
WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES 62 12.1 18.2 75.0
"PASSENGER-ONLY FERRIES"/FOOT
FERRIES
16 3.1 4.7 79.7
PIERCE TRANSIT 1 0.2 0.3 80.0
COMMUNITY TRANSIT 4 0.8 1.2 81.2
OTHER: 64 12.5 18.8 100.0
Total 340 66.4 100.0
Missing System 172 33.6
Total 512 100.0
Q2. Are you aware of Kitsap Transit or any of the services it provides?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 374 73.0 77.1 77.1
NO (SKIP TO Q7) 111 21.7 22.9 100.0
Total 485 94.7 100.0
Missing System 27 5.3
Total 512 100.0
Q3. Overall, is your perception of Kitsap Transit positive, negative, or neutral?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid POSITIVE 236 46.1 57.6 57.6
NEGATIVE 34 6.6 8.3 65.9
NEUTRAL 140 27.3 34.1 100.0
Total 410 80.1 100.0
Missing System 102 19.9
Total 512 100.0
Q4. How did you come to that perception?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH KITSAP TRANSIT
SERVICES
259 50.6 66.1 66.1
DISCUSSIONS WITH KITSAP TRANSIT CUSTOMERS 21 4.1 5.4 71.4
DISCUSSIONS WITH FAMILY/FRIENDS 58 11.3 14.8 86.2
MEDIA SOURCES (SUCH AS NEWS ARTICLES,
ONLINE INFORMATION, SOCIAL MEDIA, ETC.)
17 3.3 4.3 90.6
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-40
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid DISCUSSIONS WITH KITSAP TRANSIT CUSTOMERS 14 2.7 25.9 25.9
DISCUSSIONS WITH FAMILY/FRIENDS 32 6.3 59.3 85.2
MEDIA SOURCES (SUCH AS NEWS ARTICLES,
ONLINE INFORMATION, SOCIAL MEDIA, ETC.)
3 0.6 5.6 90.7
OTHER (SPECIFY) 5 1.0 9.3 100.0
Total 54 10.5 100.0
Missing System 458 89.5
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid DISCUSSIONS WITH FAMILY/FRIENDS 4 0.8 100.0 100.0
Missing System 508 99.2
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid MEDIA SOURCES (SUCH AS NEWS ARTICLES,
ONLINE INFORMATION, SOCIAL MEDIA, ETC.)
1 0.2 100.0 100.0
Missing System 511 99.8
Total 512 100.0
Q5. Has your perception of Kitsap Transit changed across the past year?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 390 76.2 76.2 76.2
NO 122 23.8 23.8 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q5A. Has it changed positively or negatively?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid POSITIVELY 17 3.3 51.5 51.5
NEGATIVELY 16 3.1 48.5 100.0
Total 33 6.4 100.0
Missing System 479 93.6
Total 512 100.0
Q6. What is the primary reason you have not used Kitsap Transit in the last 90 days? (select
all that apply)
Frequency Percent
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-41
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid CONVENIENCE 68 13.3 100.0 100.0
Missing System 444 86.7
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid SAFETY 4 0.8 66.7 66.7
DOES NOT TRAVEL WHERE I NEED TO GO 2 0.4 33.3 100.0
Total 6 1.2 100.0
Missing System 506 98.8
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid DOES NOT TRAVEL WHERE I NEED TO GO 47 9.2 100.0 100.0
Missing System 465 90.8
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid DOES NOT TRAVEL WHERE I NEED TO GO 1 0.2 3.4 3.4
DOES NOT TRAVEL WHEN I NEED TO GO 28 5.5 96.6 100.0
Total 29 5.7 100.0
Missing System 483 94.3
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid DOES NOT TRAVEL WHEN I NEED TO GO 3 0.6 30.0 30.0
RELIABILITY OF SERVICES 7 1.4 70.0 100.0
Total 10 2.0 100.0
Missing System 502 98.0
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid ON-TIME PERFORMANCE IS POOR 8 1.6 100.0 100.0
Missing System 504 98.4
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-42
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid PREFER TO DRIVE MYSELF 279 54.5 99.6 99.6
OTHER (SPECIFY) 1 0.2 0.4 100.0
Total 280 54.7 100.0
Missing System 232 45.3
Total 512 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid OTHER (SPECIFY) 55 10.7 100.0 100.0
Missing System 457 89.3
Total 512 100.0
Q7. Which of the following service improvements could motivate you to use public transit for
some or all of your local travel needs? Please rank up to three responses, with one being the
most important to you. – Option 1
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid MORE CONVENIENT ROUTES 150 29.3 30.1 30.1
HIGHER SERVICE FREQUENCY (MORE BUS
DEPARTURES PER HOUR)
25 4.9 5.0 35.1
IMPROVED RELIABILITY 5 1.0 1.0 36.1
IMPROVED ON-TIME PERFORMANCE 5 1.0 1.0 37.1
LOWER FARES 12 2.3 2.4 39.6
IMPROVED SAFETY AT STOPS AND/OR TRANSIT
CENTERS
8 1.6 1.6 41.2
IMPROVED SAFETY ONBOARD VEHICLES 4 0.8 0.8 42.0
PROVIDE SUNDAY SERVICE 22 4.3 4.4 46.4
EXPANDED WEEKDAY HOURS (IF SELECTED, ASK
Q7a)
5 1.0 1.0 47.4
EXPANDED SATURDAY HOURS (IF SELECTED, ASK
Q7b)
3 0.6 0.6 48.0
MORE INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN MY
PREFERRED AND/OR NATIVE LANGUAGE
2 0.4 0.4 48.4
NOTHING 257 50.2 51.6 100.0
Total 498 97.3 100.0
Missing System 14 2.7
Total 512 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-43
Q7. Which of the following service improvements could motivate you to use public transit for
some or all of your local travel needs? Please rank up to three responses, with one being the
most important to you. – Option 2
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid MORE CONVENIENT ROUTES 14 2.7 7.8 7.8
HIGHER SERVICE FREQUENCY (MORE BUS
DEPARTURES PER HOUR)
62 12.1 34.4 42.2
IMPROVED RELIABILITY 13 2.5 7.2 49.4
IMPROVED ON-TIME PERFORMANCE 3 0.6 1.7 51.1
LOWER FARES 20 3.9 11.1 62.2
IMPROVED SAFETY AT STOPS AND/OR TRANSIT
CENTERS
5 1.0 2.8 65.0
IMPROVED SAFETY ONBOARD VEHICLES 5 1.0 2.8 67.8
PROVIDE SUNDAY SERVICE 20 3.9 11.1 78.9
EXPANDED WEEKDAY HOURS (IF SELECTED, ASK
Q7a)
13 2.5 7.2 86.1
EXPANDED SATURDAY HOURS (IF SELECTED, ASK
Q7b)
3 0.6 1.7 87.8
NOTHING 22 4.3 12.2 100.0
Total 180 35.2 100.0
Missing System 332 64.8
Total 512 100.0
Q7. Which of the following service improvements could motivate you to use public transit for
some or all of your local travel needs? Please rank up to three responses, with one being the
most important to you. – Option 3
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid MORE CONVENIENT ROUTES 1 0.2 1.0 1.0
HIGHER SERVICE FREQUENCY (MORE BUS
DEPARTURES PER HOUR)
3 0.6 3.0 4.0
IMPROVED RELIABILITY 17 3.3 16.8 20.8
IMPROVED ON-TIME PERFORMANCE 6 1.2 5.9 26.7
LOWER FARES 7 1.4 6.9 33.7
IMPROVED SAFETY AT STOPS AND/OR TRANSIT
CENTERS
2 0.4 2.0 35.6
IMPROVED SAFETY ONBOARD VEHICLES 3 0.6 3.0 38.6
PROVIDE SUNDAY SERVICE 15 2.9 14.9 53.5
EXPANDED WEEKDAY HOURS (IF SELECTED, ASK
Q7a)
14 2.7 13.9 67.3
EXPANDED SATURDAY HOURS (IF SELECTED, ASK
Q7b)
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-44
Q7A. Specify when weekday hours should begin.
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 394 77.0 77.0 77.0
1:00 PM 2 0.4 0.4 77.3
1:31 PM 1 0.2 0.2 77.5
10:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 77.7
12:00 AM 3 0.6 0.6 78.3
12:00 PM 1 0.2 0.2 78.5
2:00 PM 2 0.4 0.4 78.9
2:04 PM 1 0.2 0.2 79.1
3:00 PM 2 0.4 0.4 79.5
4:00 AM 7 1.4 1.4 80.9
4:00AM 1 0.2 0.2 81.1
4:30 AM 1 0.2 0.2 81.3
4:33 PM 1 0.2 0.2 81.4
4:45 AM 1 0.2 0.2 81.6
4:50 PM 1 0.2 0.2 81.8
4:55 AM 1 0.2 0.2 82.0
4:58 PM 1 0.2 0.2 82.2
5:00 AM 24 4.7 4.7 86.9
5:00 PM 1 0.2 0.2 87.1
5:03 AM 1 0.2 0.2 87.3
5:15AM 1 0.2 0.2 87.5
5:16 AM 1 0.2 0.2 87.7
5:25 PM 1 0.2 0.2 87.9
5:30 AM 3 0.6 0.6 88.5
5:57 AM 1 0.2 0.2 88.7
6:00 AM 31 6.1 6.1 94.7
6:30 AM 3 0.6 0.6 95.3
7:00 AM 10 2.0 2.0 97.3
7:00AM 1 0.2 0.2 97.5
7:01 AM 1 0.2 0.2 97.7
7:02 AM 1 0.2 0.2 97.9
8:00 AM 5 1.0 1.0 98.8
8:11 AM 1 0.2 0.2 99.0
9:00 AM 4 0.8 0.8 99.8
9:13 PM 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-45
Q7B. Specify when weekday hours should end.
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 411 80.3 80.3 80.3
1:02 PM 1 0.2 0.2 80.5
10:00 PM 19 3.7 3.7 84.2
10:00PM 1 0.2 0.2 84.4
10:04 PM 1 0.2 0.2 84.6
10:06 PM 1 0.2 0.2 84.8
10:14 PM 1 0.2 0.2 85.0
10:17 PM 1 0.2 0.2 85.2
11:00 PM 9 1.8 1.8 86.9
11:09 PM 1 0.2 0.2 87.1
12:00 AM 12 2.3 2.3 89.5
12:00AM 1 0.2 0.2 89.6
12:01 PM 1 0.2 0.2 89.8
2:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 90.0
2:55 PM 1 0.2 0.2 90.2
4:42 PM 1 0.2 0.2 90.4
5:00 PM 3 0.6 0.6 91.0
5:30 PM 1 0.2 0.2 91.2
6:00 AM 2 0.4 0.4 91.6
6:00 PM 5 1.0 1.0 92.6
6:22 PM 1 0.2 0.2 92.8
6:38 PM 1 0.2 0.2 93.0
7:00 PM 7 1.4 1.4 94.3
7:01 PM 1 0.2 0.2 94.5
7:28 PM 1 0.2 0.2 94.7
7:30PM 1 0.2 0.2 94.9
8:00 PM 12 2.3 2.3 97.3
8:11 PM 1 0.2 0.2 97.5
8:30 PM 1 0.2 0.2 97.7
9: PM 1 0.2 0.2 97.9
9:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 98.0
9:00 PM 9 1.8 1.8 99.8
9:38 PM 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-46
Q7C. Sepcify when Saturday hours should begin.
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 433 84.6 84.6 84.6
10:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 84.8
10:00 PM 1 0.2 0.2 85.0
10:47 AM 1 0.2 0.2 85.2
12:00 AM 5 1.0 1.0 86.1
2:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 86.3
4:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 86.5
4:30 AM 1 0.2 0.2 86.7
5:00 AM 7 1.4 1.4 88.1
5:00 PM 1 0.2 0.2 88.3
5:28 AM 1 0.2 0.2 88.5
5:38 PM 1 0.2 0.2 88.7
6:00 AM 13 2.5 2.5 91.2
6:00 PM 1 0.2 0.2 91.4
6:01 AM 1 0.2 0.2 91.6
6:14 AM 1 0.2 0.2 91.8
6:34 AM 1 0.2 0.2 92.0
6:49 PM 1 0.2 0.2 92.2
7:00 AM 14 2.7 2.7 94.9
7:09 AM 1 0.2 0.2 95.1
7:16 AM 1 0.2 0.2 95.3
8:00 AM 15 2.9 2.9 98.2
8:06 AM 1 0.2 0.2 98.4
8:09 AM 1 0.2 0.2 98.6
8:11 AM 1 0.2 0.2 98.8
9:00 AM 6 1.2 1.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-47
Q7D. Sepcify when Saturday hours should end.
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 444 86.7 86.7 86.7
10:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 86.9
10:00 PM 5 1.0 1.0 87.9
10:28 PM 1 0.2 0.2 88.1
10:34 PM 1 0.2 0.2 88.3
10:38 PM 1 0.2 0.2 88.5
11:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 88.7
11:00 PM 1 0.2 0.2 88.9
11:27 PM 1 0.2 0.2 89.1
12:00 AM 14 2.7 2.7 91.8
12:16 AM 1 0.2 0.2 92.0
2:00 AM 1 0.2 0.2 92.2
2:00 PM 2 0.4 0.4 92.6
4:42 PM 2 0.4 0.4 93.0
5:00 PM 1 0.2 0.2 93.2
5:30 PM 1 0.2 0.2 93.4
6:00 PM 7 1.4 1.4 94.7
6:01 PM 1 0.2 0.2 94.9
6:09 PM 1 0.2 0.2 95.1
6:43 PM 1 0.2 0.2 95.3
7:00 PM 3 0.6 0.6 95.9
8:00 PM 9 1.8 1.8 97.7
8:04 PM 1 0.2 0.2 97.9
8:06 PM 1 0.2 0.2 98.0
8:11 PM 1 0.2 0.2 98.2
8:50 PM 1 0.2 0.2 98.4
9:00 PM 7 1.4 1.4 99.8
9:14 PM 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q8. If a “fast ferry” service was introduced between Bremerton and downtown Seattle,
would you ride it?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 280 54.7 55.3 55.3
NO 226 44.1 44.7 100.0
Total 506 98.8 100.0
Missing System 6 1.2
Total 512 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-48
Q9. If “fast ferry” service was introduced between Bremerton and downtown Seattle, how
much would you be willing to pay for a one-way trip?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 151 29.5 29.5 29.5
$0.00 42 8.2 8.2 37.7
$0.50 1 0.2 0.2 37.9
$1.00 4 0.8 0.8 38.7
$1.25 1 0.2 0.2 38.9
$1.50 1 0.2 0.2 39.1
$10.00 31 6.1 6.1 45.1
$11.00 1 0.2 0.2 45.3
$11.75 1 0.2 0.2 45.5
$12.00 1 0.2 0.2 45.7
$13.00 1 0.2 0.2 45.9
$14.00 3 0.6 0.6 46.5
$15.00 8 1.6 1.6 48.0
$2.00 13 2.5 2.5 50.6
$2.50 4 0.8 0.8 51.4
$24.00 1 0.2 0.2 51.6
$3.00 49 9.6 9.6 61.1
$3.25 1 0.2 0.2 61.3
$3.50 1 0.2 0.2 61.5
$3.65 1 0.2 0.2 61.7
$4.00 23 4.5 4.5 66.2
$4.50 1 0.2 0.2 66.4
$40.00 1 0.2 0.2 66.6
$5.00 102 19.9 19.9 86.5
$6.00 13 2.5 2.5 89.1
$6.50 1 0.2 0.2 89.3
$7.00 28 5.5 5.5 94.7
$7.50 6 1.2 1.2 95.9
$8.00 18 3.5 3.5 99.4
$8.25 1 0.2 0.2 99.6
$9.00 2 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-49
Q10. Currently Kitsap Transit charges two dollars for a one-way passenger fare, and also
offers a fare at one dollar for Medicare card holders, youth, seniors, and persons with
disabilities. Do you believe these fares are appropriate, too high, or too low?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid APPROPRIATE 407 79.5 82.4 82.4
TOO HIGH 65 12.7 13.2 95.5
TOO LOW 22 4.3 4.5 100.0
Total 494 96.5 100.0
Missing System 18 3.5
Total 512 100.0
Q11A. What do you think is a fair price to charge for a one-way trip onboard Kitsap Transit
local service bus?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 91 17.8 17.8 17.8
$0.00 6 1.2 1.2 18.9
$0.25 1 0.2 0.2 19.1
$0.50 16 3.1 3.1 22.3
$0.75 7 1.4 1.4 23.6
$1.00 69 13.5 13.5 37.1
$1.25 1 0.2 0.2 37.3
$1.50 28 5.5 5.5 42.8
$1.75 2 0.4 0.4 43.2
$2.00 267 52.1 52.1 95.3
$2.25 4 0.8 0.8 96.1
$2.30 1 0.2 0.2 96.3
$2.50 5 1.0 1.0 97.3
$2.75 1 0.2 0.2 97.5
$3.00 8 1.6 1.6 99.0
$3.50 1 0.2 0.2 99.2
$5.00 2 0.4 0.4 99.6
$6.00 1 0.2 0.2 99.8
$7.00 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-50
Q11B. What do you think is a fair price to charge for a one-way trip onboard the foot ferry?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 110 21.5 21.5 21.5
$0.00 44 8.6 8.6 30.1
$0.50 3 0.6 0.6 30.7
$0.75 2 0.4 0.4 31.1
$1.00 27 5.3 5.3 36.3
$1.25 4 0.8 0.8 37.1
$1.50 10 2.0 2.0 39.1
$1.75 1 0.2 0.2 39.3
$10.00 5 1.0 1.0 40.2
$12.00 2 0.4 0.4 40.6
$15.00 1 0.2 0.2 40.8
$2.00 64 12.5 12.5 53.3
$2.50 8 1.6 1.6 54.9
$3.00 66 12.9 12.9 67.8
$3.50 5 1.0 1.0 68.8
$3.75 1 0.2 0.2 68.9
$30.00 1 0.2 0.2 69.1
$4.00 29 5.7 5.7 74.8
$4.50 1 0.2 0.2 75.0
$5.00 84 16.4 16.4 91.4
$5.50 3 0.6 0.6 92.0
$6.00 13 2.5 2.5 94.5
$6.50 1 0.2 0.2 94.7
$7.00 19 3.7 3.7 98.4
$7.50 2 0.4 0.4 98.8
$8.00 5 1.0 1.0 99.8
$9.00 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q12. Would you support a dedicated tax to improve local public transit service?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES, NO HESITATION 187 36.5 37.3 37.3
YES, IF THE BENEFITS TO TRANSIT WERE VERY
CLEARLY PRESENTED
66 12.9 13.1 50.4
MAYBE, DEPENDS ON PURPOSE AND/OR
AMOUNT OF THE TAX
47 9.2 9.4 59.8
NO 167 32.6 33.3 93.0
I DON'T KNOW 35 6.8 7.0 100.0
Total 502 98.0 100.0
Missing System 10 2.0
Total 512 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-51
Q13. Would you support a Kitsap Transit fare increase to enhance service if the resulting
funds were used to enhance public transit service in Kitsap County?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 262 51.2 53.5 53.5
NO 228 44.5 46.5 100.0
Total 490 95.7 100.0
Missing System 22 4.3
Total 512 100.0
Q13A. What level of fare increase would you support?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid TWENTY-FIVE CENTS 160 31.3 63.2 63.2
FIFTY CENTS 68 13.3 26.9 90.1
SEVENTY-FIVE CENTS 7 1.4 2.8 92.9
ONE DOLLAR 18 3.5 7.1 100.0
Total 253 49.4 100.0
Missing System 259 50.6
Total 512 100.0
Q14. Thinking of your typical weekly travel, what is your most common trip purpose? (select
only one)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid HEALTHCARE 78 15.2 15.8 15.8
WORK/COMMUTE TRIP 138 27.0 27.9 43.6
SCHOOL 17 3.3 3.4 47.1
SHOPPING 155 30.3 31.3 78.4
PERSONAL BUSINESS 56 10.9 11.3 89.7
RECREATION/SOCIAL 33 6.4 6.7 96.4
OTHER 18 3.5 3.6 100.0
Total 495 96.7 100.0
Missing System 17 3.3
Total 512 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-52
Q14A. Thinking of your typical weekly travel, what is your most common trip purpose? (select
only one) – Other (specify)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 508 99.2 99.2 99.2
DOESN'T HAVE A COMMON TRIP
PURPOSE
1 0.2 0.2 99.4
DRUGS 1 0.2 0.2 99.6
HAS 4 KIDS/KID RELATED 1 0.2 0.2 99.8
VISIT MY WIFE - HAS ALZHEIMERS 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q15. How often do you make your most frequent trip?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid ONE OR TWO TIMES PER WEEK 195 38.1 39.6 39.6
3-5 TIMES A WEEK 218 42.6 44.3 83.9
6 OR MORE TIMES PER WEEK 79 15.4 16.1 100.0
Total 492 96.1 100.0
Missing System 20 3.9
Total 512 100.0
Q16. How do you typically make that trip?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid WALK 9 1.8 1.8 1.8
BICYCLE 3 0.6 0.6 2.5
WHEELCHAIR OR SCOOTER 1 0.2 0.2 2.7
DRIVE MYSELF 398 77.7 81.4 84.0
RIDE WITH OTHERS (FOR EXAMPLE,
CARPOOL OR VANPOOL)
60 11.7 12.3 96.3
KITSAP TRANSIT ROUTED BUS 5 1.0 1.0 97.3
FOOT FERRY 6 1.2 1.2 98.6
OTHER PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE (SPECIFY) 7 1.4 1.4 100.0
Total 489 95.5 100.0
Missing System 23 4.5
Total 512 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-53
Q17. Would you consider using public transit to complete that trip some of the time?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 151 29.5 30.8 30.8
MAYBE 266 52.0 54.2 84.9
NO 74 14.5 15.1 100.0
Total 491 95.9 100.0
Missing System 21 4.1
Total 512 100.0
Q17A. Are there any circumstances under which you would consider using public transit to
compete that trip some of the time?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid IF MY PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES WERE TO
CHANGE
92 18.0 27.5 27.5
IF OTHER OPTIONS WERE UNAVAILABLE 20 3.9 6.0 33.4
IF THE COST OF FUEL BECAME TOO HIGH 11 2.1 3.3 36.7
IF SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS WERE MADE 42 8.2 12.5 49.3
NOTHING WOULD GET ME TO USE PUBLIC
TRANSIT
170 33.2 50.7 100.0
Total 335 65.4 100.0
Missing System 177 34.6
Total 512 100.0
Q17B. How high woul fuel prices need to rise (per gallon) before you would consider using
public transportation?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 501 97.9 97.9 97.9
$10.00 3 0.6 0.6 98.4
$4.00 1 0.2 0.2 98.6
$4.50 2 0.4 0.4 99.0
$5.00 4 0.8 0.8 99.8
$5.50 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-54
Q18. What are your most common methods of obtaining information and/or news regarding
public transit service? (select all that apply)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid PRINTED MATERIALS (BROCHURES,
SYSTEM MAPS, RIDER GUIDES, ETC.)
57 11.1 12.3 12.3
CUSTOMER SERVICE PHONE NUMBER 14 2.7 3.0 15.3
FRIENDS/FAMILY 51 10.0 11.0 26.3
EMPLOYER 4 0.8 0.9 27.2
SMARTPHONE/MOBILE APP 11 2.1 2.4 29.5
NEWSPAPER 71 13.9 15.3 44.8
RADIO 4 0.8 0.9 45.7
KITSAP TRANSIT WEBSITE 89 17.4 19.2 64.9
OTHER WEBSITE 17 3.3 3.7 68.5
SOCIAL MEDIA (FACEBOOK, TWITTER,
ETC.)
8 1.6 1.7 70.3
OTHER 37 7.2 8.0 78.2
DON'T TYPICALLY GET PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION
101 19.7 21.8 100.0
Total 464 90.6 100.0
Missing System 48 9.4
Total 512 100.0
Q18A. Which radio stations?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 508 99.2 99.2 99.2
107.7 FM 1 0.2 0.2 99.4
90.9 KBTI 1 0.2 0.2 99.6
komo 1 0.2 0.2 99.8
seattle stations 1 0.2 0.2 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q19. Are you registered to vote?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 410 80.1 80.1 80.1
NO 69 13.5 13.5 93.6
DECLINE TO STATE 33 6.4 6.4 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-55
Q20A. Did you vote in the last local election?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 311 60.7 60.7 60.7
NO 114 22.3 22.3 83.0
DECLINE TO STATE 87 17.0 17.0 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q20B. Did you vote in the last state election?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 343 67.0 67.0 67.0
NO 79 15.4 15.4 82.4
DECLINE TO STATE 90 17.6 17.6 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q20C. Did you vote in the last national election?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid YES 378 73.8 73.8 73.8
NO 47 9.2 9.2 83.0
DECLINE TO STATE 87 17.0 17.0 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q21. What is your age?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid UNDER 18 3 0.6 0.6 0.6
18-25 10 2.0 2.0 2.5
26-35 38 7.4 7.4 10.0
36-45 44 8.6 8.6 18.6
46-55 80 15.6 15.6 34.2
56-65 126 24.6 24.6 58.8
66 OR OLDER 158 30.9 30.9 89.6
DECLINE TO STATE 53 10.4 10.4 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-56
Q22. How many people live in your household?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 32 6.3 6.3 6.3
1 149 29.1 29.1 35.4
11 1 0.2 0.2 35.5
12 2 0.4 0.4 35.9
2 169 33.0 33.0 68.9
3 64 12.5 12.5 81.4
4 43 8.4 8.4 89.8
5 25 4.9 4.9 94.7
6 17 3.3 3.3 98.0
7 7 1.4 1.4 99.4
8 1 0.2 0.2 99.6
9 2 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid DECLINE TO STATE 9 1.8 100.0 100.0
Missing System 503 98.2
Total 512 100.0
Q23. What is your annual household income?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid UNDER $15,000 26 5.1 5.1 5.1
$15,000-$24,999 33 6.4 6.4 11.5
$25,000-$49,999 79 15.4 15.4 27.0
$50,000-$74,999 57 11.1 11.1 38.1
$75,000-$100,000 35 6.8 6.8 44.9
OVER $100,000 40 7.8 7.8 52.7
DECLINE TO STATE 242 47.3 47.3 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
Q24. What is your gender?
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid MALE 177 34.6 34.6 34.6
FEMALE 307 60.0 60.0 94.5
DECLINE TO STATE 28 5.5 5.5 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-57
Q25. What is your ethnicity? (select all that apply)
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid WHITE 396 77.3 77.3 77.3
BLACK 9 1.8 1.8 79.1
HISPANIC/LATINO 15 2.9 2.9 82.0
AMERICAN INDIAN OR
ALASKA NATIVE
12 2.3 2.3 84.4
ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER 7 1.4 1.4 85.7
OTHER (SPECIFY) 7 1.4 1.4 87.1
DECLINE TO STATE 66 12.9 12.9 100.0
Total 512 100.0 100.0
2013 Market Research Studies
Kitsap Transit
Final Report
Moore & Associates, Inc. | 2013
B-58
This Page Intentionally Left Blank.
15 2.9 14.9 82.2
NOTHING 18 3.5 17.8 100.0
Total 101 19.7 100.0
Missing System 411 80.3
Total 512 100.0
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid BUS STOP TOO FAR FROM MY ORIGIN AND/OR
MY DESTINATION
38 7.4 100.0 100.0
Missing System 474 92.6
Total 512 100.0
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid COST 14 2.7 100.0 100.0
Missing System 498 97.3
Total 512 100.0
OTHER (SPECIFY) 37 7.2 9.4 100.0
Total 392 76.6 100.0
Missing System 120 23.4
Total 512 100.0
Bus needs to wait longer for ferry customers 1 0.4 0.4 61.5
RUSSIAN 1 0.1 0.1 99.9
Cumulative
Percent
4.0%
14.3%
50.0%
43.6% 46.2%
40.6% 37.2%
64.0%
29.4%
50.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 Decline to
state
Under $15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$49,999 $50,000-$74,999
$75,000-$100,000 Over $100,000 Decline to state
information
available in
my preferred
and/or
native
language
Nothing
n = 512
Our experience conducting transit market research in communities through the West has led us to
conclude that “convenience” is often viewed as similar to “ease of access” (e.g., proximity of bus stop to
home or destination). Interestingly, the results of the concurrent onboard survey reveal that most
Kitsap Transit riders access the service by walking just over three blocks. Therefore, there is a possibility
this is more an issue of awareness (i.e., where the bus actually travels) versus actual route alignment.
three options.
The three top-ranked responses (Option 1) were “more convenient routes” (30.1 percent), “higher
service frequency” (5.0 percent), and “provide Sunday service” (4.4 percent). “Higher service
frequency” was the top-ranked Option 2 response (34.3 percent), followed by “lower fares” and
“provide Sunday service” (11.1 percent each). “Improved reliability was the top-ranked Option 3
response (16.8 percent), followed by “provide Sunday service” and “expand Saturday hours” (14.9
percent each).
Real-time arrival information
Service frequency
Stroller parking on buses
Sunday service
Vanpools
Vehicle condition
noperation = 114 Vehicle
$150,000
to
$199,999
$200,000
or more
n = 1,301
n = 1,369
n = 1,400
n = 1,381
n = 1,391
n = 1,388
n = 1,384
n = 1,386
Route 35
Route 36
Route 37
Route 41
Route 43
Route 66
Route 70
Route 81
Route 84
Route 86
Route 90
Route 91
Route 92 n = 233
7 to 10
blocks
11 to 15
blocks
More
than 15
blocks
n = 653
Route 36
Route 37
Route 80
Route 86
Route 90
Route 95
Route 99 n = 247
Transit
Mason
Transit
Pierce TransitKitsap Transit
ACCESS
n = 247
n = 655
Total Direct Costs
TOTAL COST
Grand Total
DATA ENTRY
TRAVEL/PER DIEM
TRANSLATION
PRINTING/PRODUCTION
SURVEYORS
Subtotal, Direct Labor
Burden and Overhead
Total Labor
Direct Costs
Task5 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task8 4 Task Task 6 Task 7 Task Task 9 Task 10
Principal in Charge
Jose Perez
Project Manager
Surveyors
Chris Vandepas
Market Research Manager
Field Supervisors
Data Entry/GIS Technicians
non-riders to use its services, Kitsap Transit sought to
better understand transit’s broader role in Kitsap
County through a dedicated community survey of
those who do not currently use transit. A total of 512
responses was achieved, reflecting an aggregate 95-
percent confidence level and +/- five percent margin
of error.
Staff: Jim Moore (project manager), Jose Perez (data
analysis and reporting), Chris Vandepas (scheduling,
training, field supervision, data analysis).
Work Sample: The full report is provided as a .pdf
document at the end of this proposal.
Section 3: Project Personnel
We propose Senior Associate Jose Perez as project
manager. Jose holds a Bachelor of Arts in Urban
Studies and Planning from the University of California
in San Diego. He has designed and managed
customer and community surveys for transit providers
throughout California including Antelope Valley Transit
Authority, City of Santa Clarita, Fairbanks (AK) North
Star Borough, Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority, Maricopa (AZ) Association of
Governments, Monterey-Salinas Transit, Morongo
Basin Transit Authority, San Diego Association of
Governments, and Ventura County Transportation
Commission. Jose is fluent in Spanish, regularly
translating Spanish-language survey materials, training
bilingual survey staff, and interpreting for Spanish-
speaking respondents as needed. He recently served
as survey manager for SANDAG’s pre-BRT survey and
LACMTA’s 2014 Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey.
transportation-disadvantaged populations (defined as
households lacking access to a personal vehicle) were
generated in support of NICE’s Title VI program.
Staff: Jim Moore (project manager), Jose Perez
(survey planning and instrument development), Chris
Vandepas (field supervison and data cleaning).
Work Sample: The full report is located at the following
URL: http://www.nicebus.com/NiceBus/media/Nicebus-
PDFs/Onboard_Survey_12_2013.pdf
City of Tucson (SunTran)
2013 Transit Survey Services
Mary McLain, Assistant General Manager
520.206.8806 | mary.mclain@tucsonaz.gov
In 2013, the City of Tucson sought to develop a profile
of travel and demographic characteristics of its Sun
Tran fixed-route customers as well as patrons of other
transit providers in the region. The City engaged
Moore & Associates to obtain a statistically-valid
sample of responses from riders using each service,
with the resulting data to be used to fulfill several
reporting and planning objectives. Moore & Associates
utilized a stratified random-sampling methodology to
provide data that accurately represents all rider types
on all fixed-route services for which the City requested
surveying. Formal sampling targets were calculated for
each route and service using actual average daily
ridership data provided by the City. Our sampling plan
was weighted such that individual route sampling
targets ensured a confidence level of 95 percent and a
five percent margin of error (based on daily average
ridership by route).
access, which directly reduces printing, postage, and
telecommunication impacts. For other direct printing
costs, Moore & Associates utilizes recycled paper as
well as provides in-house recycling to reduce waste.
Whenever possible, our staff utilizes teleconferences
and video conferences in order to minimize travel. In
addition, Moore & Associates encourages its
employees to utilize public transit for commuting and
traveling.
Section 2: Qualifications and
Experience
Firm Experience
Founded in 1991 and incorporated in California, Moore
& Associates, Inc. is a full-service “brick-and-mortar”
public transportation consulting firm. We are a
collaborative firm with dedicated full-time employees
who meet regularly to discuss current and future
project goals. For nearly 25 years we have provided a
broad range of transit planning, auditing, marketing,
market research, and general management services
for more than 150 public transit and transportation
entities throughout the western United States.
Moore & Associates, and particularly our proposed
project team, has successfully completed surveying
and outreach efforts in numerous communities
throughout all regions of California, Alaska, Arizona,
Texas, Utah, Washington, and beyond. Our project
team possesses significant collective experience
gained from successful collaboration on a variety of
assignments, including market research projects for
the City of Santa Clarita, City of Tucson, City of Visalia,
Fairbanks (AK) North Star Borough, Golden Empire
identification of key findings, our project manager will
prepare a report to summarize onboard survey results.
The report will provide an overview of the survey
methodologies and data analysis, including findings
from the data cross-tabulations. All simple frequencies
will be provided in an appendix.
The report will include clear, easy-to-read graphics
(charts and tables) supported by narrative. Where
appropriate, other data (such as census demographic
data) may be used to illustrate how Transfort’s
customers compare with the overall population. Data
from prior survey efforts will serve as a baseline to
develop a trend analysis.
Our final report will synthesize the deliverables arising
from the previous tasks and incorporate any edits
and/or comments from the draft report review. It will
begin with an Executive Summary that provides a brief
overview of the steps involved in performing the survey
and data analysis, as well as the key findings that
resulted from the survey that are of greatest
importance to the City.
Following the Executive Summary, the final report will
present a more detailed description of our findings,
which will include descriptions of rider profiles, fare
usage, rider demographics, and travel patterns.
Included will be a section of the simple frequencies
where the exhibits and maps are based on.
In addition to describing our key findings, the final
report will also provide more detailed documentation of
the survey instrument development, administration,
sampling methodology, data entry, data cleaning, as
well as the analytical methods we used to arrive at our
awareness among transit customers about the
upcoming survey opportunity.
Task 6: Conduct Survey
All surveyor supervisors will be seasoned full-time
Moore & Associates’ staffers who have conducted
numerous survey projects across methodologies
ranging from intercept to online. Our survey
coordinators have a proven track record for completing
onboard surveys with temporary staff for many diverse
transit systems. They all started with surveying in the
field so they are experienced with meeting project
goals and expectations If a surveyor is not performing,
a supervisor will step in and finish the survey schedule
him- or herself.
Surveyor equipment
Each surveyor will be easily identified by a reflective
vest and an identification badge worn on a lanyard
around the neck. Prior to arriving at the assigned
boarding location, each surveyor will be provided with
a tote bag containing survey forms, clipboards, and
pens, as well as a schedule highlighting the assigned
collection times/trips.
Survey times
Surveying will be conducted during weekday and
weekend service hours. Weekday surveying will cover
all service hours for all routes, but not necessarily 100
percent of the trips. A weekend sample will cover a
sample representing the entire service day. All routes
(regular fixed routes) and specialized routes (such as
the MAX and FLEX) will be covered excluding the
Green and Gold late night services. Surveying will be
conducted while CSU is in regular session and exclude
any holidays or breaks that might have an effect on
obtaining an accurate sample.
later time. A custom URL and QR code would be
displayed on the promotional material to facilitate its
use. In order to track online surveys and match them
to route and time information, qualifier questions will be
asked including route, time, and direction. Any online
responses will be identified as such added to the
survey data for the corresponding route. (Alternately,
we can provide the online option only to those who
receive a paper survey on the vehicle, requiring them
to enter the serial number of the paper survey into the
online form to more closely track the route/trip on
which it was distributed.)
At this time, we will also coordinate with the City to
determine what constitutes a “complete” survey. This
can either be determined by percent complete or
whether specific “required” questions have been
answered.
Task 3: Recruit and Train Surveyors
Our project manager will oversee the recruitment,
training, and supervision of data collectors/surveyors.
We will work with a local staffing firm to recruit quality
bilingual personnel. Given the surveyors are
conducting work on behalf of the City, we will recruit
individuals with a professional appearance and
demeanor as well as the skills necessary to conduct
the survey. Based on experience, our practice is to
train more surveyors than we need so that back-up
personnel and replacements are available as needed.
We will provide the job description and training outline
to the City prior to recruitment.
While the staffing firm conducts a background check
and ensures each recruit is legally able to work in the
manager will coordinate a project initiation meeting
with the City’s project manager. Subsequent to the
project initiation meeting, our staff will work with City
staff to evaluate questionnaire topics, outline fielding