TRAVEL REDUCTION
PROGRAM
Annual Report
2015
Maricopa County Air Quality Department

Travel Reduction Program

July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015
Philip A. McNeely, R.G.
Acting Director, Air Quality Department
Prepared by
Maricopa County Travel Reduction Program Staff
Maria Cody, Travel Reduction Program Manager

Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Travel Reduction Program
1001 North Central Ave. – Ste 550
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(602)506-6750

Permission to quote from or reproduce materials from this
publication is granted when due acknowledgement is made.

Maricopa County
Air Quality Department

SUBJECT:

Travel Reduction Program – Fiscal Year 2015 Annual Report

DATES:

July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015
ADEQ Contract No. - EV11-00065, Amendment 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

During the Fiscal Year 2014-2015 (FY15) grant year, Maricopa County continued the Travel
Reduction Program (TRP) and outreach efforts in support of the voluntary “Clean Air
Campaign”. Results were gathered from detailed statistical summary reports from each
employee and student site participating in the program. During FY15, there were 2,985 sites in
the TRP representing 1,158 companies. This year, the survey was administered to over 796,000
commuters. In addition, the TRP Task Force, along with the TRP staff, reviewed and approved
1,162 trip reduction plans. The following report tracks and analyzes the commuting habits of
employees and students in Maricopa County.
The TRP is continually identifying new sites required to participate in the program. This ongoing effort has resulted in 41 new employee and student sites incorporated into the TRP and
completing their baseline year during FY15. While companies phased in and out of the TRP,
the number of active sites remained approximately 2,950 throughout the year.
An aggregate analysis of the sites processed during FY15, for both employee and student
participants, produced the following statistical results: 1) commuters in the TRP saved 11,392
tons of pollution by using an alternative mode of transportation; and 2) the TRP’s e-survey was
used by more companies than ever before, an increase of 5.7% year-over-year.
The TRP has two forms of its online e-survey. Employers can choose either the intranet or
internet version. Overall, 408 companies had their employees/students use the e-survey this
year. Eleven companies programmed the intranet version onto their systems for their
employees to use and 397 companies had their employees access the Maricopa County web-site
for the internet form. Some of the larger companies used the intranet version, accounting for
nearly one-tenth of all employees.
Companies that used the e-survey saved the TRP from providing over 463,000 paper forms; this
was an increase of 8.6% more electronic surveys compared to last year. When the TRP first
started administering the e-survey, its goal was to have a 35% usage by all employees. This year,
58% of TRP employees/students used the e-survey to complete their survey. In addition,
student sites increased their use of the e-survey by 13% over last year.

1001 North Central Avenue, Suite 550, Phoenix, AZ 85004 ~ Phone 602-506-6750 ~ www.maricopa.gov/aq/

MARICOPA COUNTY REGIONAL
TRAVEL REDUCTION PROGRAM
2015 Annual Report

INTRODUCTION
During Fiscal Year 2015, 2,985 employment sites were processed by the Travel Reduction Program
(TRP). Of all the sites, 41 were baseline (first year sites). The TRP produces a detailed statistical
summary report for each employment and student site. This year, the program administered the
survey to over 796,000 employees and students. In addition, the TRP Task Force, along with the
TRP staff, reviewed and approved 1,162 Trip Reduction plans. The following report tracks and
analyzes the commuting habits of employees and students in Maricopa County.
The 1988 Omnibus Clean Air Legislation laid the foundation for the Maricopa County TRP.
Employers with 100 or more employees were required to (1) reduce the single occupancy vehicle
rate (SOV) by 5% annually, (2) name a transportation coordinator, (3) provide trip reduction
information to all employees and/or students, (4) conduct an annual trip reduction survey and (5)
submit an annual trip reduction plan.
The Trip Reduction Ordinance (TRO) adopted by the Board of Supervisors in September 1992
became effective January 1, 1993. This ordinance expanded the TRP by requiring employers with
75 to 99 employees to participate. The 1993 ordinance also established a SOV floor of 60%, and it
improved SOV rate and SOV target calculations.
The TRO was amended May 26, 1994 with the following changes effective July 1, 1994; (1)
employer SOV reduction goals were increased from 5% for the first five target years to 10%
(employers in their sixth and subsequent target years have a SOV target of 5% annually), (2)
employers with 50 to 74 employees were incorporated into the program and (3) employers were
given credit towards SOV reduction goals for using Reduced Emission Vehicles (REV).
In May 1996, the TRO was amended and ten Equivalent Emission Reduction (EER) measures were
implemented. The ordinance became effective in July 1997. The EER ordinance measures allow
for credit to be given to companies toward meeting their trip reduction goals by implementing
alternative air pollution reduction strategies. These strategies are listed on a separate form and
submitted with their trip reduction surveys on an annual basis.
In the first program year of the TRP, approximately 500 employers and 800 employment sites were
affected by the TRP. The implementation of the 1993 TRO added 300 employers and 700 sites to
the program. With the implementation of the 1994 TRO, there are currently over 1,100 employers
and 2,900 sites participating in the TRP.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

PROGRAM OVERVIEW
The TRP’s operational functions are divided into two sections: Operations/Research Data Analysis
and Plan Review/Monitoring.
Operations / Research Data Analysis
Operations section’s primary responsibilities are: 1) coordinating survey delivery and processing
data; 2) monitoring new employers for incorporation into the TRP; 3) tracking effected employers
to ensure that questionnaires and other requirements are submitted on schedule; and 4) developing
policies and procedures.
The Research Data Analysis section is responsible for analyzing survey data and generating
summary analysis reports for each employment site; analyzing and measuring the overall impact of
the TRP on reducing single occupant commutes; and producing quarterly, annual and special
reports for internal and external requests. In FY15, the Research/Data Analysis section sent out
2,793 summary analyses for employers and schools. In addition, they completed reports and
supplied statistical data results for employers, researchers, city planners, news affiliates and
individuals.
Plan Review/Monitoring
The Plan Review/Monitoring section reviews and evaluates all submitted TRP plans to determine if
proposed strategies and/or incentives are adequate to achieve targeted SOV reductions. There
were 1,162 TRP plans that were reviewed and approved by the Task Force and staff during FY15.
The Plan Review staff also monitors employers to ensure that trip reduction plans are implemented
accordingly. Monitoring activities include on-site visits and phone calls to employers. This year
there were 612 monitoring phone calls and 711 site visits completed. Employers not in compliance
with TRP’s policies and procedures can receive a Notice of Violation (NOV). During FY15, 47
NOV’s were issued to employers who did not meet the statutory requirements. Of those referred
to the TRP Task Force for enforcement, all were withdrawn following compliance by the respective
employer.
Valley Metro/ RPTA
Both the Maricopa County TRP and the Valley Metro/Regional Public Transportation Authority
(RPTA) provide staff to coordinate the benefits of both the TRP and the Clean Air Campaign.
The RPTA is a sub-contracted organization that provides training, technical assistance and
promotional material to all affected organizations. During the past year, six Introduction to the
Trip Reduction Program training classes were conducted with a total of 225 attendees. In addition,
17 in-person Transportation Coordinator Association (TCA) meetings were held across the Valley;
136 people attended. Twelve TCA webinars were held with a total of 86 in attendance. Over
12,000 technical assistance and consultative service contacts were made to Valley organizations.
This year, RPTA facilitated 54 presentations and events for TRP employees, with approximately
4,546 employees in attendance. Now in its twenty-eighth year, awareness of the Clean Air
Campaign continues to grow with the public.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

ANNUAL REPORT METHODOLOGY
The Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program’s method for measuring employers’
compliance with the program is based on an employer’s current site year. This methodology allows
for the aggregation of data by the current TRP program year. New employment sites are added on
a continual basis. The total number of employees/students commuting patterns is measured to
determine TRP’s overall effectiveness on reducing single occupant vehicle trips and miles.
This year, aggregate data is only shown for the first program year (FY 1991) and the last five fiscal
years. This is done to show how the TRP compares to the inaugural year and reflect the most
recent trend of data. For purposes of maintaining consistency and tracking a company’s historical
data from one year to the next, data gathered for a company are based upon the company’s
anniversary date.
The regional calculation for the number of miles needed to generate one-pound of pollution, for an
average vehicle, was 70.5 for the first and second quarters and 73.5 miles for third and fourth
quarters of the fiscal year. This factor was used to calculate the amount of pollution saved annually
in the program. The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) has provided the data, citing
EPA's MOVES2010b for the first and second quarters and MOVE2014 for the third and fourth
quarters as its source.
The staff members of the Maricopa County Travel Reduction Program and the Regional Public
Transportation Authority (RPTA) work closely to the benefit of both the TRP and the Clean Air
Campaign.
The FY15 Travel Reduction Program Final Report is highlighted with samples of program material,
aggregate results of the annual survey, and the calculation methodology. Questions or comments
should be addressed to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, Travel Reduction Program,
1001 N. Central Ave. #550, Phoenix, AZ 85004.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

NUMBER OF TRP PARTICIPANTS
The Maricopa County region affected by the Travel Reduction Program (TRP) has recorded
continual growth since the inception of the program in 1989. TRP’s overall participation has
increased 161% since the first program year.
Based on current DES estimates for the Greater Phoenix-Glendale-Mesa metropolitan Area nonfarm workforce, there are approximately 1,865,200 employees. TRP employees account for over
32.8% of those Maricopa County residents. In addition, ‘Student’ sites contribute another 184,761
participants to the overall population tracked by the TRP.

Number of TRP Participants
FY 1991 / FY 2011 - 2015

800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000

'91

300,000

'11
'12

200,000

'13
100,000
0

'14
2015
Students

Employees

All

The number of all TRP participants has steadily increased each year of the program. When
compared to DES estimates for non-farm workforce, TRP employees increased by 2.58%, while the
DES workforce showed an increase of 2.49% from the previous year. The student count increased
by 80% over the last four years, with a 7% this year alone. The number of student participants
increased over the last two years, because the total student population for Arizona State University
has been counted. This has resulted in dramatic changes in the response rates for the year when
compared to the previous year.
Number of Participants
Site Type
Students*
Employees
All

FY 91

FY 11

53,943
251,112
305,055

102,478
573,002
675,480

FY 12

FY 13

FY 14

FY 2015

106,081
577,432
683,513

111,224
582,172
693,396

172,889
596,153
769,042

184,761
611,527
796,288

*Student population includes high school juniors and seniors, colleges, universities and vocational institutions.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

1

TRP Participation by Quarter for FY 2015
During the third quarter, the TRP surveyed many of the larger companies and high schools. Most
secondary schools, which make up 39% of the student population, surveyed in the second and third
quarters. This ensures that high schools, universities and colleges will receive their survey results
before the end of the school year and have time to implement their TRP plan before the end of its
current school year. For employees, the least amount of surveys administered was during the first
quarter, which is traditionally lower because employees are taking time off during the summer
vacation season.
Site Type
Students
Employees
All

200,000
175,000

1st
Quarter
20,500
138,049
158,549

2nd
Quarter
72,828
143,598
216,426

3rd
Quarter
88,615
149,072
237,687

4th
Quarter
2,818
180,808
183,626

Total
Year
184,761
611,527
796,288

Number of TRP Participants
by Quarter - FY15
Students
Employees

150,000
125,000
100,000
75,000
50,000
25,000
0

1st Qtr

2nd Qtr

3rd Qtr

4th Qtr

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

2

TRP RESPONSE RATES
During FY15, 2,985 sites were analyzed. This included 2,859 ‘Employee’ sites and 126 ‘Student’
sites. The TRP questionnaire was administered to 796,288 employees and students this year with an
overall response rate of 60.82%.

Response Rates by Sites
FY 1991 / 2011 - 2015

85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
45%

Students

40%

Employees

35%
30%

All Sites
'91

'11

'12

'13

'14

2015

The response rate is calculated by dividing the number of questionnaires completed by the number
of the employees at the site. If the response rate for an employer is less than the required 60%, a
company is directed to resurvey that site. The data collected by the TRP is very comprehensive, and
is requested by numerous outside agencies and organizations for detailed analysis and reports.
The response rate for 'All' site types decreased for this year. The student response rate was lower
than the employee response rate, 31.15% and 69.79% respectively.
Response Rates
Site Type

FY 91

FY 11

FY 12

FY 13

FY 14

FY 2015

Students*
Employees
All

73.36%
84.24%
82.32%

70.39%
77.85%
76.72%

58.56%
74.53%
72.05%

58.13%
73.77%
71.26%

34.17%
70.08%
62.01%

31.15%
69.79%
60.82%

*Student population includes high school juniors and seniors, colleges, universities and vocational institutions.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

3

TRP Response Rates by Quarter for FY 2015
In FY15, the response rates fluctuated each quarter. Although there is no distinguishable pattern
throughout the year, the fourth quarter had the highest response rates for ‘All’ sites. For ‘Employee’
sites, the second quarter had the highest response rates. ‘Student’ responses were their lowest
during the second quarter, Arizona State University surveyed during this period and the overall
numbers for students were recalculated during this year.
Site Type

Students
Employees
All

1st
Quarter
42.21%
66.65%
63.49%

2nd
Quarter
28.47%
72.43%
57.63%

3rd
Quarter
30.52%
71.35%
56.13%

4th
Quarter
39.28%
68.81%
68.35%

Current
Year
Average
31.15%
69.79%
60.82%

Response Rates by Site
by Quarter - FY15

80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%

Students
Employees
All
1st Qtr

2nd Qtr

3rd Qtr

4th Qtr

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

4

ALTERNATIVE MODE TRIPS
Alternative Trips by Mode
as a Percentage of Total Trips
FY 2015

35%

AFV
Bike

30%

Bus - P
25%

Bus - S
Light
Rail
C-Pool

20%

15%

Walk
CWW

10%

TComm
V-Pool

5%

0%

Students

All

Employees

TRP participants continue to use alternative modes with more frequency each year. During this
year, carpool usage continued to be the highest type of alternative mode used for ‘All’ site types.
‘Student’ and ‘Employee’ sites used carpooling as their primary alternative mode.
Students used carpooling for 31.2% of all their commuting trips. Other alternative modes used
mainly by students were taking the bus (16.1%) and walking (8.6%). These three modes account for
over 55% of commuting habits by students. Employees carpooled 9.5% of the time, while CWW
accounted for 3.1% of alternative trips and using tele-commuting resulted in 2.9%.
Alternative Mode Trips as a
Percentage of Total Trips by Quarter
FY 2015

12%

1st Qtr
2nd Qtr

10%

3rd Qtr
4th Qtr

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%

AFV

Bike

Bus - P

Light Rail

C-Pool

Walk

CWW

T-Comm

V-Pool

Carpooling continues to be the highest percentage of trips taken by alternative mode users. The
second and third quarters showed the largest use of carpooling. The two other alternative modes
mostly used by commuters (compressed work week and tele-commuting) were used in the first
quarter.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

5

POUNDS OF POLLUTION
TRP participants continue to use alternative modes of transportation for 34.19% of their
commuting miles. In FY15, for ‘All’ sites, pounds of pollution saved daily totaled 87,632 pounds
per day.
There were multiple circumstances that affected the results of the amount of pollution saved by the
program: 1) because of newer and environmentally cleaner vehicles on the road, the pounds of
pollution factor was recalculated mid-way through the year from 70.5 to 73.5 miles per one-pound
of pollution; and 2) the number of completed surveys returned by employers cause fluctuations in
the aggregated results year over year.
Pounds of Pollution Saved by Mode
MODE

Generated
SOV
Saved
AFV
Bike
Bus (Public)
Bus (School)
Carpool
Light Rail
CWW*
TeleComm*
Vanpool
Walk
Alternative
Mode Total
Total Miles

* Miles not driven

STUDENT SITES

Miles Daily
(Both - Ways)

Pounds of
Pollution

EMPLOYEE SITES

Miles Daily
(Both - Ways)

Saved Daily 1

325,938
390
81
432
1,456
4,999
40

14,838
442,157

248
7,646

ALL SITES

Miles Daily
(Both - Ways)

Saved Daily 1

9,697,980

21,744
4,917
23,630
81,037
293,615
2,376

768,095

Pounds of
Pollution

Saved Daily 1

10,023,918

460,106
45,215
331,718

7,712
748
5,324

1,747,125
40,617
456,853
546,804
1,108,312
15,618
4,752,368

29,386
660
7,879
9,472
18,558
247
79,986

14,450,348

Pounds of
Pollution

481,850
50,132
355,347
81,037
2,040,741
42,993
456,853
546,804
1,108,312
30,456
5,194,525

8,102
829
5,756
1,456
34,385
700
7,879
9,472
18,558
495
87,632

15,218,443

1 To calculate the pounds of pollution saved daily, the “Miles Daily” was divided by 70.5 for the first and second quarters and 73.5 for the third and
fourth quarters. Using the third and fourth quarters as an example, 73.5 is the number of miles driven needed to generate one pound of pollution
using the most recent standards.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

6

POLLUTION SAVED
TRP participants continue to save more pounds of pollution each year. This year alone, the amount
of pollution potentially saved by the 796,228 employees/students responding to the survey was
estimated at 18,090 tons. This was an increase of 5.8% from last year.
Site Type

Students
Employees
All 5

Total Pounds of Pollution Saved
Pounds of
Tons of
Tons of
Pollution Saved
Pollution Saved
Pollution Saved
Daily
Weekly 2
Annually 3
7,646
79,986
87,632

19.1
200.0
219.1

994
10,398
11,392

Potential Tons of
Pollution Saved by
TRP Annually 4
3,191
14,899
18,090

Pounds of pollution saved are calculated by dividing the miles that were not driven by commuters
using an alternative mode of travel by 73.5. Seventy-three and five-tenths is the number of miles
that is calculated to be driven in order to produce one pound of pollution.
Below is the equation to calculate one pound of pollution:
VOC + NOx + CO
+ PM = 1 lb. of pollution *
7.26%
8.58%
84.03%
0.13%
The on-road emissions model used to calculate miles per pound for Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles
(LDGV) was updated this reporting period by the EPA. It officially replaced the previous emissions
model, Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2010b), with the MOVES2014 model. The
new model continues to calculate how many miles driven it takes to generate one-pound of pollution
for a standard on-road vehicle.
For this reporting period the TRP conversion rate for Natural Gas vehicles is derived from the
MOBILE6.2 model. Currently, the EPA is making adjustments to their model to calculate emission
rates for Light Duty CNG Vehicles (LD NGV) and plan to release an updated version in the future.
The LD NGV calculation is used to measure the credit amount given for commuters who select
Alternative Fuel Vehicles (AFV) as their mode use.
2 “Tons of Pollution Saved Weekly” is calculated by dividing the “Pounds of Pollution Saved Daily” by 2000, and then multiplying the result by the
number of trips taken weekly by an average commuter, which is set to be five by the TRP, i.e. for students, (7,646/2000)* 5 = 19.1 tons.
3 Weekly tons are then multiplied by 52 to calculate “Tons of Pollution Saved Annually”, 19.1 * 52 = 994 tons.
4 “Potential Tons of Pollution Saved by TRP Annually” is calculated by extrapolating out to the number of TRP participants who had the survey
administered to them. The “Tons of Pollution Saved Annually” is divided by the response rate, i.e. 57,545 students answered the survey for a response
rate of 31.15% (.3115); 994/.3115 = 3,191. All 184,761 TRP students could have saved 3,191 tons of pollution in FY15.
5 The numbers for ‘All’ site types is calculated by adding the totals from the ‘Student’ site and ‘Employee’ site rows.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

7

SOV TRIP RATES
The Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) trip and Single Occupant Vehicle Miles Traveled (SOVMT)
rates indicate how well a company is doing at reducing employee/student trips and miles. In order
for a company to achieve their reduction goal for the year it must meet or exceed either one of these
target rates.

SOV Rates
FY 1991 / 2011 - 2015
85%

75%

65%

All Sites
Employees
Students

55%

45%

35%

'91

'11

'12

'13

'14

2015

The SOV trip rate is calculated by dividing the number of SOV trips by the total trips taken for all
commuters. This is also done separately for ‘Employee’ sites and ‘Student’ sites in order to compare
their rate of change.
Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) Trip Rate
Students
FY 91
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15

46.78%
37.82%
37.73%
38.28%
39.37%
39.34%

Change from
Previous Year
-0.23%
1.45%
2.84%
-0.01%

Employees
81.86%
76.94%
76.38%
75.90%
77.58%
75.57%

Change from
Previous Year
-0.72%
-0.62%
2.21%
-2.59%

All
74.92%
72.09%
71.89%
71.15%
73.00%
71.42%

Change from
Previous Year
-0.28%
-1.02%
2.60%
-2.16%

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

8

SOVMT RATES
This year the SOVMT showed a decrease of 0.04% for ‘All’ sites when compared to last fiscal year.
'Student' and 'Employee' sites showed the following rate changes, -0.11% and -0.07% respectively.

SOVMT Rates
FY 1991 / 2011 - 2015
All Sites
Employees
Students

85%
75%
65%
55%
45%

'91

'11

'12

'13

'14

2015

The SOVMT rate is calculated by dividing the number of SOV miles traveled by the total number of
miles driven by all commuters. This is also done separately for ‘Employee’ sites and ‘Student’ sites
in order to compare their rate of change.
Single Occupancy Vehicle Miles Traveled (SOVMT) Rate
Students
FY 91
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15

65.49%
45.95%
48.24%
48.72%
49.23%
48.69%

Change from
Previous Year
4.98%
0.99%
1.04%
-0.11%

Employees
85.78%
75.55%
75.01%
74.68%
74.50%
74.00%

Change from
Previous Year
-0.71%
-0.43%
-0.24%
-0.07%

All
83.57%
73.64%
73.46%
73.19%
73.09%
72.77%

Change from
Previous Year
-0.24%
-0.36%
-0.13%
-0.04%

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

9

COMMUTING TO WORK
Start Times for TRP Participation - FY15
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%

Mid

2:00

4:00

6:00

8:00

10:00

Noon

2:00

4:00

A.M.

6:00

8:00

10:00

P.M.

The peak hours for Maricopa County commuters traveling to work are between 5:00 a.m. and 9:00
a.m.; 72% of all commuters are on the road during this time. During the morning rush, the time
between 7:00 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. is the most heavily traveled. There is also a second shift peak
between 2:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. when commuters make their way to work.
Quit Times for TRP Participation - FY15
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%

Mid

2:00

4:00

6:00
A.M.

8:00

10:00

Noon

2:00

4:00

6:00

8:00

10:00

P.M.

Conversely, quit times for commuters peak between 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.. Over 66% of all
commuters are leaving the workplace during this time. However, the peak for departing workers is
not as great as that of arrival times. This is caused by workers who complete their eight-hour shifts
prior to the afternoon rush or those who put in extended hours. The time between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00
p.m. showed the largest numbers of commuters leaving from work.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

10

HOW FAR IS THE COMMUTE?
Commute to work in Miles
70%

Employee
Student

Percentage of Commuters

60%

All

50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
<= 5

6-10

11-15

16-20

21-25

26-30

31-35

36-40

41-50

>50

Miles

In FY15, the typical TRP commuter (employee or student) could have expected to drive, on the
average, 13.9 miles one-way to work or school. While the average drive for an employee was 15.2
miles to work, students drove an average of 7.1 miles one-way to school. Overall, 27.4% of all TRP
participants drive less than five miles to work/school. Another 43.5% of the commuters live
between 11 and 30 miles from work. Over 7.6% of all commuters have a drive of over 30 miles.
Average Trip Length
by Mode of Transportation
July 2014 - June 2015

35

30

25
Overall
Bike

Miles

20

Bus (Public)
15.1

15

14.0

Car Pool
Light Rail
SOV

10

Walk
6.3

Bus (School)
CWW

5

TeleComm
0

VanPool
Students

Employees

All

Values are shown for Overall trip length

The average trip length by mode split shows that employee trips on all accounts are longer than
student trips. However, employees’ longest commuting trips are taken using an alternative mode,
not SOV’s. The longest of these trips using alternative modes are vanpools (34.3 miles) and trips
not taken (CWW’s – 17.1 miles, and Telecommuting – 21.3 miles). This suggests that those
commuters who live farthest from work are more likely to reduce the number days they drive into
their worksite by using one of these alternative mode types as their commuting method.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

11

HOW LONG DOES THE COMMUTE TAKE?

Commute to work in Minutes

35%
30%

Percentage of Commuters

25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
<= 5

6-10

11-15

16-20

21-25

26-30

31-35

36-40

41-45

46-50

>50

Minutes
Employee

Students

Typically, TRP participants can expect to spend an average of 24.0 minutes commuting to work or
school. Students take an average of 15.9 minutes to get to school, while employees average 24.7
minutes to get to their worksite.
Approximately 56.2% of all commuters take less than 20 minutes to arrive at work/school. The
largest group of all respondents is represented by those who take between 11 and 15 minutes to
commute, while 25.9% of commuters take over 30 minutes or more to get to their worksite. Nearly,
28.6% of all employees take more than 30 minutes to arrive at their workplace. For students, 68.6%
commute to school in 15 minutes or less.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

12

VALLEY COMMUTING PATTERNS
Commuting within the Valley
30
Minutes
Miles

25

20

15

10

5

Chandler

Gilbert

Glendale

Mesa

Peoria

Phoenix

Scottsdale

Tempe

Of the eight largest municipalities in the Valley, the time and distance spent commuting to work can
vary depending upon where one lives. For all communities, the time spent commuting correlates to
the distance traveled to work.
The two Valley communities that have the longest commute in minutes and miles are Peoria and
Gilbert. This may be that these commuters must travel outside of their area of residence to get to
their worksite. With the exception of the City of Mesa, all these major cities found that their TRP
participants distance traveled and time spent commuting increased from last year.
Commuting During the Morning Rush
30

28.8

28
26
24
22
5:30
AM
6:00

20
18

6:30

16.7

16

7:00

14

7:30
8:00

12
10

8:30
5:30am

Minutes
to work

9:30am

9:30am

5:30am

Miles
to work

For Valley commuters, the morning rush is worse during the later portion of the commute. The
average morning commute takes about 28.8 minutes and is 16.7 miles long, both increased from last
year. A TRP commuter may experience, nearly a 29-minute drive if they begin work at 8:30 a.m.,
even though it is one of the shorter commute trips. It is also noted that those who have a longer
distance to commute, depart for work earlier in the morning.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

13

WHERE TRP EMPLOYEES LIVE
COMPARED TO WHERE THEY WORK
Where People Live/Work
Live

200,000

Work

175,000
150,000
125,000
100,000
75,000
50,000

Unknown

Outside
County

Maricopa
County

Tempe

Scottsdale

Phoenix

Peoria

Glendale

Gilbert

Chandler

0

Mesa

25,000

During FY15, 420,380 employees responded to the survey indicating their city of residence. For the
purposes of this report, only those cities whose residents total 20,000 or more employees in the TRP
for the year are listed.
As expected, the City of Phoenix is the largest contributor in both residents and number of
employees in the workforce. While 139,627 residents live in Phoenix, 194,865 work within the city
limits. Other cities that have a positive employee/resident ratio (more employees working in an area
than live in that area) are Scottsdale and Tempe. This trend indicates that these cities have to
accommodate more commuters coming into their communities during the rush hours. Additional
use of alternative modes of transportation will be needed in order to reduce traffic congestion
associated with commuters getting to their worksite.
Conversely, all other major cities in the area have a negative employee/resident ratio (more resident
live within the city, than work in that area). These communities also face the task of commuters
returning to their residences. The Town of Gilbert shows true characteristics of a ‘bedroom
community’; while there are 28,499 residents in Gilbert who participate in the TRP, only 12,694
TRP participants work in Gilbert.
The following charts show two completely different examples of demographic trends here in the
Valley. The city of Phoenix represents the typically large metropolitan area with major employers
within the city limits, while the Town of Gilbert shows signs of being the suburban enclave where
commuters live, but work in surrounding cities.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

14

Of all Phoenix residents in the TRP, 67.8% (86,840) live and work within the city limits.
Approximately 26.5% of all other Phoenicians work in adjoining major cities. While the rest of the
city’s residents work throughout the County, representing only 5.7% of Phoenix TRP residents.
Where Phoenix Residents Work
128,126 Residents

70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Chandler

Glendale

Phoenix

Tempe

Scottsdale

Tolleson

Rest of
Maricopa
County

Representing the other side of commuter travel, the majority of the Town of Gilbert residents work
in other cities in the Valley; over 82% work outside of Gilbert. Only 17.6% of the TRP participants
(4,838) who live in Gilbert also work within the city limits. This indicates that Gilbert residents who
participate in the TRP continue to seek work outside of the town, resulting in a true bedroom
community. Comparatively, for the other major cities in Maricopa County, the average percentage
of residents who live and work in the same city is approximately 34% for TRP participants. The
Town of Gilbert is substantially below the average for other major cities in Maricopa County.

Where Gilbert Residents Work
27,447 Residents

25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%

Chandler

Gilbert

Mesa

Phoenix

Scottsdale

Tempe

Rest of
Maricopa
County

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

15

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Mode Use by Gender

80%

Female

70%

Male

60%
50%
40%
30%
20%

Total

SOV

Walk

VanPool

TeleComm

Light Rail

CWW

CarPool

Bus

0%

Bike

10%

For this year, over 404,000 TRP participants answered the optional question on gender. Females
account for 53.4% of the total responses. While women show a higher percentage than men do of
carpooling and tele-commuting, men are more likely to use bike and vanpool in larger numbers.
The greatest disparity is represented by bicyclists. Men are more likely to bike to work than women,
by a 3:1 ratio.
Mode Use by Age Group

50%

40%

30%
Bike
Bus
20%

CarPool
CWW
Light Rail

10%

TeleComm
VanPool

55+
Years

45-54
Years

35-44
Years

<25
Years

0%

25-34
Years

Walk

For those who responded to the optional question on age, the older the age group in TRP, the more
likely the commuter will use vanpooling and compressed work week (CWW) as their alternative
mode to get to their worksite. The younger age groups are more apt to use biking and walking when
traveling to work. Those younger than 25 years old are more likely to use a bike, carpool, walk or
bus than any other group and are the least likely to use telecommuting as an alternative mode by a
greater disparity. The 35-44 year old group telecommutes more often than other groups. Those 55
years and older, typically use CWW or vanpools more than any other group.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

16

WORK ACTIVITY FOR TRP PARTICIPANTS
In recent years the TRP has monitored the work activity of employees by adding the
following question. “What best describes your primary work activity on a regular basis?”
The categories for work activity were chosen based upon demographic modeling tracked by
the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). With a more detailed listing of each
group described below. For brevity’s sake, all work activities are abbreviated on the pie
charts.
Administrative
Business
Community
Engineering
Personal Care
Production
Sales & Marketing
Technical

Administrative/Clerical/Retail
Business/Financial/Professional
Community Support/Teaching
Engineering/Research/Design
Personal Care & Services
Production/Construction/Transport
Sales & Marketing
Technical Support

For an overall analysis of work activities by TRP employees, the chart on the left shows how
commuters identify themselves in their jobs. Generally speaking, one of the largest number of
respondents fall into the category of ‘Administrative’; over 23% of employees claim they perform
some type of administrative function daily.
In order to give a contrast of what type of work activity an employee does and what type of
alternative mode they may use, a side by side comparison is shown below. To limit charts and
graphs, only one example of an alternative mode is shown, tele-commuting. Comparatively, 11.7%
of all tele-commuters work an administrative job. This comparison makes perfect sense. Those in
‘Production’ and ‘Personal Care’ are less likely to have the opportunity to tele-commute, because
their type of job does not allow for them to work from home.

Tele-Commuting by Work Activity

Primary Work Activity of TRP Employees
Sales & Marketing
9.5%
Production
13.0%

Technical
4.4%

Production
2.8%
Personal Care
1.5%

Personal Care
9.4%

Technical
10.5%

Sales & Marketing
16.8%

Administrative
11.7%

Engineering
8.5%
Administrative
23.1%

Engineering
15.3%

Community
11.1%

Business
21.0%

Business
38.5%
Community
2.9%

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

17

TRIP REDUCTION PLANS
During Fiscal Year 2013-2015, the County received 1,072 plans and presented 1,162 plans to the
Task Force for review and approval. Of those approved by the Task Force 47 of them were first
year plans.

TRP Plans Approved

175
150
125
100
75
50
25
0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Plan Year

Monitoring
The TRP staff will follow-up with employer to confirm their approved plan has been
implemented/documented. A substantial amount of monitoring occurs through written and verbal
channels, with the balance accomplished by staff visiting the employer sites. During this year, 612
monitoring calls were made and 711 site visits were conducted. When an employer fails to
implement or document one or more approved measure(s), staff will issue a ‘Request for
Documentation’ (RFD) to resolve the matter. During this year, staff issued 408 RFDs.
Enforcement
Enforcement is initiated when an employer fails to respond to staff’s outreach regarding a pending
delinquency. Enforcement activities occurring during FY15 are as follows:
● Forty-seven (47) Notices of Violation (NOV) were issued for failure to submit a plan, supply
documentation or appoint a Transportation Coordinator.
● No formal legal action was taken and no civil penalties were levied in FY15.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

18

CONCLUSION
In FY15, the TRP is currently in its twenty-sixth year of operations. Analysis of the TRP data show
that the employees/students participating in the TRP continue to be strong supporters of using
alternative modes of transportation in order to get to work or school. The TRP has shown an
increase in the number of trips saved and pounds of pollution saved this year.
A number of changes in methodology used to collect and calculate commuter miles, trips, modes
and pollution saved impact this reporting period. The reporting outcome was affected by one or
more of the following reasons: 1) credits for Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) use were calculated for
trips or miles driven. Full or partial credit was given to electric, hybrid and natural gas vehicles; 2)
other external factors impacted commuter driving patterns, such as: the calculation factors used to
determine how many miles are driven to produce one-pound of pollution. The regional
miles/pound factor increased from 70.5 to 73.5; and 3) the number of completed surveys returned
by employers cause fluctuations in the aggregated results year over year.
Alternative mode users in the TRP continue to support the program by showing a substantial
amount of miles driven weekly in order to reduce Valley pollution. The total amount saved this year
was 25.9 million miles weekly for alternative mode commuters. Carpool and vanpool miles
accounted for 60.6% of all miles saved. The miles saved by TRP commuters resulted in 11,392 tons
of pollution not being produced. Even though commuting distances and time traveled to the
worksite have increased this year, TRP participants continue to make environmentally sound
decisions by choosing to use an alternative mode in order to lessen their SOV trips.
The employees who participate in the program continue their support of the TRP as shown by a
high survey response rate, 69.79%. Employee's contribution to the amount of pollution saved
annually accounted for 91.2% in the TRP. The e-survey continued to be a successful format for
TRP employers to survey their employees. The number of companies using the e-survey this year
increased from 386 to 408, 56.5% of all employees used the e-survey this year.
The miles saved by alternative mode use for students resulted in 994 tons of pollution saved this
fiscal year. In addition, this was the fourth year where students used the e-survey. The number of
students filling out the web-based survey increased to 64.3% of all students. Since new high school
driving-age students enter the TRP annually, RPTA’s efforts to educate students on the program's
environmental benefits represent an ongoing training opportunity. Educating students on the use of
alternative modes to commute will only increase the probability that once the students are out in the
workplace they will continue with their learned environmental commuting practices.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
ADEQ Annual Report --- July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2015

19

COMPANIES PARTICIPATING IN THE TRIP REDUCTION PROGRAM
E-SURVEY PROCESS FY 2015
Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

Care1st Health Plan
City of Mesa
City of Phoenix
Fuji Films Electronic Materials
Maricopa Association of Governments
Mesa Air Group, Inc.
Perkins Coie
State of Arizona
Town of Gilbert
TRW Vehicle Safety Systems Inc.
U-Haul International
Verizon Wireless

235
2,723
12,143
215
103
222
132
20,530
897
391
3,331
1,484

235
2,723
12,143
215
103
222
132
20,575
897
391
3,331
1,484

1
21
42
1
1
1
1
50
4
1
2
3

TOTALS

42,406

42,451

128

Intranet

$124
$1,110
$4,842
$116
$72
$119
$83
$8,165
$386
$186
$1,351
$619
$17,171

Internet - Employees

AAA
AAA-AZ Operations Center dba CSAA
Abeinsa, EPC
Abrazo Advantage Health Plan
Abrazo Arrowhead Campus
Abrazo Health Care Regional Office
ADP, Inc.
Adreima
AECOM
AECOM - URS
Aero Design & Manufacturing
Aetna Medicaid Business Unit
AGIA Insurance Services
Airline Training Center AZ, Inc.
Alaska Airlines, Inc.
Albertsons Holdings, LLC
Alliance Beverage Distributing Company
Alliance Defending Freedom
Alliance Home Loans
Alsco, Inc.
American Express
American Express Global Business Travel
American Family Insurance
American International Group
American Reliable Insurance Co.
American Traffic Solutions
APL, Ltd.
Apollo Group, Inc.
Apria Healthcare Group, Inc.

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

229
802
100
240
478
264
265
70
55
113
52
1,856
129
99
176
1,200
79
148
93
40
5,480
140
296
69
199
498
200
5,900
363

229
802
100
240
720
264
265
70
55
113
113
1,856
129
99
191
1,200
200
148
93
79
5,480
140
296
69
199
498
200
5,900
363

1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
2
1
4
2

$122
$349
$70
$126
$220
$135
$136
$59
$53
$76
$51
$766
$82
$70
$101
$506
$62
$89
$68
$47
$2,202
$86
$148
$58
$110
$228
$110
$2,368
$175

Internet (con't)

APSM Systems
Arizona Biltmore Resort
Arizona Cardinals
Arizona Central Credit Union
Arizona College
Arizona Coyotes Hockey Club
Arizona Diamondbacks
Arizona Grand Resort
Arizona Nutritional Supplements
Arizona Science Center
Arizona State University
Arrowhead Honda
Artesyn Embedded Technologies
ASM America Inc.
ASU Foundation
ATK - Integrated Weapons Systems Division
Autozone
Avesis
Avnet, Inc.
Axway, Inc.
Aztec Engineering
BAE Systems Support Solutions
Ballard Spahr LLP
Bank of America
Banner Health
Bard Peripheral Vascular
Barron Lighting Group
BBVA Compass
Beatitudes Campus

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

50
113
175
100
60
103
215
100
126
132
12,585
124
235
285
145
129
350
255
1,888
229
106
170
61
6,562
15,009
367
48
275
429

163
700
175
100
60
103
215
673
512
132
12,585
124
235
285
145
129
350
255
2,364
229
106
295
61
6,562
15,009
402
64
275
439

1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
3
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
5
1
1
1
1
6
15
1
1
2
1

$51
$76
$100
$70
$55
$72
$116
$70
$81
$83
$5,017
$80
$124
$144
$88
$82
$169
$132
$779
$122
$73
$98
$55
$2,631
$5,977
$176
$50
$140
$201

Internet (con't)

Bechtel Corporation
Benchmark Electronics PT Division
Benson Systems
Best Western International, Inc.
Blackboard, Inc.
BLM National Training Center
Blood Systems
Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Arizona, Inc.
Boeing Co.
Brookline College
Bull Information Systems, Inc.
Cable One Inc. - Park Central
Cable One, Inc.- Corp Office
Camelback Inn dba J W Marriott
Caris Life Sciences
Cartwright School District
CBIZ MHM, LLC
CDW Direct, LLC
Celerion
Cemex
CH2M Hill, Inc.
Chandler Unified School Dist.
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.
Choice Hotels International, Inc.
Chubb & Son/ Div of Federal Insurance
Cigna Healthcare of Arizona Inc.
Circle K Stores Inc.
City of Avondale
City of Chandler

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

367
112
30
878
96
68
489
1,336
3,717
97
98
220
440
225
180
1,557
82
230
220
84
93
3,191
3,423
372
420
1,705
355
515
1,545

367
112
30
878
96
68
700
1,336
3,717
97
98
220
440
631
180
1,557
82
230
220
160
93
3,191
3,423
372
420
1,705
355
515
1,545

1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
21
1
1
1
2
1
38
3
1
1
8
1
2
5

$176
$75
$43
$379
$69
$58
$225
$560
$1,503
$69
$70
$118
$205
$120
$102
$648
$63
$122
$118
$64
$68
$1,295
$1,387
$178
$197
$706
$171
$235
$643

Internet (con't)

City of El Mirage
City of Glendale
City of Goodyear
City of Scottsdale
City of Surprise
City of Tempe
Clear Call Solutions
CNA National Warranty Corporation
Colony American Homes
Comfort Systems USA - Southwest
Comtech EF Data
Consumer Cellular
Country Club at DC Ranch
Cox Communications, Inc.
Crafco, Inc.
Credit Union West
Cummins Rocky Mountain LLC
CVS/Caremark
CWT Phoenix Central TSC
CyraCom
Datasphere Technologies Inc.
DBL Distributing, dba Ingram Micro
DCMA - Phoenix
Deer Valley Unified School District
Deloitte & Touche LLP
Delta Career Education Corporation
Delta Dental of Arizona
Dept of Vet Affairs-Regional Office
Desert Schools Federal Credit Union

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

57
1,500
268
2,246
170
1,302
289
234
138
80
345
335
25
1,438
67
103
65
3,135
120
624
104
78
155
3,966
71
300
75
488
1,288

57
1,677
268
2,246
170
1,302
289
234
138
80
345
335
110
1,438
67
103
88
3,135
120
624
104
78
155
3,966
71
300
75
488
1,301

1
3
3
8
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
40
1
1
1
1
5

$53
$625
$137
$921
$98
$547
$145
$124
$85
$62
$167
$164
$41
$601
$57
$72
$57
$1,273
$78
$278
$72
$62
$92
$1,602
$59
$150
$61
$224
$541

Internet (con't)

Dickinson Wright
Dick's Sporting Goods
Diffusion Group LLC, dba Meltmedia
Dignity - Dell Services
Dignity Health
Dignity Health Mercy Gilbert Hospital
Dignity Health, dba Chandler Regional Medical
Dircks Moving Service
Direct Energy, dba First Call
Discount Tire Company
Discover Financial Services
District Medical Group
DLR Group
DMB Associates, Inc.
DriveTime
Dysart School
Early Warning Services
EDMC, OHE, dba Education Development
EDUPRIZE Schools, LLC
Edward Jones
Element Payment Services
Empereon Marketing
Empire Southwest LLC
Enghouse Interactive
Equity Fund Advisors.Inc.
Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co./FBL Fincl
Farmers / 21st Century Ins.
Fennemore Craig, P. C.
Fidelity National Information Services

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

110
32
59
75
931
826
852
35
425
494
2,818
640
57
104
1,304
2,362
330
1,066
178
829
96
597
789
64
308
54
371
288
200

110
150
59
75
931
946
1,556
74
425
494
2,818
640
57
104
1,304
2,362
330
1,066
178
829
96
597
814
64
308
54
371
288
200

1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
26
1
3
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2

$74
$43
$54
$61
$400
$358
$368
$45
$199
$227
$1,147
$284
$53
$72
$547
$967
$162
$453
$101
$359
$69
$267
$343
$56
$153
$52
$178
$145
$110

Internet (con't)

First American Home Buyers Protection
First Solar
Five Star Quality Care - Pueblo Norte
Fluke Corporation
Food for the Hungry
Food Services of America
Four Seasons Resort Scottsdale
Freeport-McMoRan
Freescale Semiconductor Inc.
Gallagher & Kennedy P.A.
Garmin
GE Capital Solutions
General Dynamics AIS
General Dynamics Mission Systems
Glynlyon
GM - Arizona IT Innovation Center
GoDaddy.com
Goodmans, Inc.
Government Liquidation, LLC, dba Liquidity Svc
Govig & Associates
Grand Canyon University
Graybar Electric Company, Inc.
Great American Title Agency
Gruber Industries
HDR Engineering Inc
Health Net
Health Services Advisory Group
Healthways
Heat Software

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

237
332
29
64
72
124
100
701
2,008
180
147
200
449
1,732
170
515
3,091
57
98
59
2,864
98
63
42
108
185
250
325
85

237
332
156
64
72
124
300
701
2,008
180
147
200
449
1,732
170
515
3,091
57
98
59
2,924
98
63
85
108
185
250
339
85

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

$125
$162
$42
$56
$59
$80
$70
$309
$826
$102
$89
$110
$209
$717
$98
$235
$1,255
$53
$70
$54
$1,166
$70
$56
$47
$74
$104
$130
$160
$64

Internet (con't)

Higley Unified School District
Honeywell
HonorHealth
IASIS Healthcare Holding, Inc.
IBM Corporation
iCrossing, Inc.
IHC Administrative Services
iHeart Media Phoenix
Insight Direct Inc.
Institute of Supply Management
Integra Telecom of Arizona
Intel Corporation
International Cruise & Excursions, Inc.
International Paper
IPro Tech, LLC
J.W. Marriott Desert Ridge Resort & Spa
JDA Software Inc
Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, P.L.C.
Jones, Skelton & Hochuli
JPMorgan Chase
Kimley, Horn & Associates
Knight Transportation, Inc.
Kutak Rock LLP
Kyrene School District
Laureate Education, Inc.
Laveen Elementary School District
Le Cordon Bleu College
Legacy Insurance Services
Lewis Roca Rothgerber, LLP

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

892
8,213
7,140
350
509
70
155
148
2,338
56
96
11,268
1,346
44
139
100
353
96
199
4,550
160
290
80
2,121
179
700
60
97
215

1,109
8,213
7,140
350
509
70
155
148
2,731
56
96
11,268
1,346
120
139
600
353
96
199
4,550
160
290
80
2,121
179
700
60
97
215

13
5
8
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
1
26
1
8
1
1
1

$384
$3,285
$2,860
$169
$232
$59
$92
$89
$957
$53
$69
$4,495
$564
$48
$86
$70
$171
$69
$110
$1,834
$94
$146
$62
$871
$102
$308
$55
$69
$116

Internet (con't)

LifeLock
Limelight Networks, Inc.
Litchfield Elementary School Dist.
Loan Depot
Londen Insurance Group, Inc.
Macerich
Macy's Logistics & Operations
Magellan Health Services
MAPFRE Insurance
Maricopa County Comm. College Dist.
Maricopa County Government
Maricopa Integrated Health Systems
Marshalls Distribution Center
MassMutual
Matrix Medical Network
Matson Navigation Company, Inc.
Mayo Clinic
McMurry, Inc.
MD Helicopters
MDS Communications Corporation
MedPlast Inc.
Medtronic Microelectronics Center
Mercer Human Resource Consulting
MGA
Michael Baker Jr., Inc.
Microchip Technology, Inc.
Microsoft Southwest
Midwestern University
Miraca Life Science

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

448
233
1,141
185
272
187
99
272
240
4,298
8,519
1,850
129
340
314
132
5,605
85
264
68
54
687
142
94
82
1,709
65
620
128

448
233
1,141
185
272
187
368
272
240
4,298
11,678
2,133
594
340
314
132
5,605
85
264
302
117
687
142
94
82
1,709
65
620
128

1
1
14
1
1
1
1
1
1
16
21
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1

$208
$123
$483
$104
$139
$105
$70
$139
$126
$1,734
$3,406
$764
$82
$166
$155
$83
$2,252
$64
$135
$58
$52
$303
$87
$68
$63
$708
$57
$276
$82

Internet (con't)

Mitel
Mobile Mini
Morgan Stanley
Mutual Insurance Company of AZ
Mutual of Omaha Bank
National Bank of Arizona
Natural Partners
Naumann-Hobbs Material Handling, Inc.
Nautilus Insurance Company
New Times
New Vision, dba Vemma
NextCare
NMG Aerospace
Norwegian Cruise Line
Notre Dame Preparatory
NPL Construction
Oakwood Worldwide Sales & Service Center
Oasis Hospital
On Q Financial
OnePoint Patient Care
OPTUM
Orbital ATK
Orbital Sciences Corporation
O'Reilly Auto Parts
Origami Owl
Paradise Valley Unified School Dist.
Parsons Brinckerhoff
PayPal, Inc.
Pearson

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

145
165
129
97
275
220
77
43
248
127
224
189
142
350
100
149
265
136
104
60
461
255
1,213
110
205
3,452
50
2,170
526

145
165
129
97
275
220
77
108
248
127
224
189
142
350
100
240
265
186
104
60
461
255
1,213
110
365
3,452
74
2,170
526

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
45
1
2
1

$88

$96
$82
$69
$140
$118
$61
$48
$129
$81
$120
$106
$87
$169
$70
$90
$136
$85
$72
$55
$213
$132
$511
$74
$112
$1,398
$51
$891
$239

Internet (con't)

Pegasus Research Group LLC, dba Televerde
Pegasus Solutions
Peoria Nissan
Peoria Unified School Dist
Pepsi Bottling Group
Performance Software Corporation
Permanent General Companies
PF Chang's China Bistro, Inc.
Phoenix Children's Hospital
Phoenix Coca-Cola Bottling Company
Phoenix Country Day School
Phoenix Indian Health Service
Phoenix VA Healthcare Systems
Piedmont Airlines
PING Inc.
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
Pointe Hilton Resorts
Polsinelli , P.C.
Pricewaterhouse Coopers
Prisma Graphic Corp.
Progressive Insurance Corp.
Prudential Group Insurance
PSCU
Pulte Home Corporation
Quarles & Brady
Quicken Loans
RED Development
Redflex Traffic Systems
Republic Services, Inc.

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

145
65
63
3,717
115
101
157
224
1,131
235
141
1,256
1,562
359
214
5,110
147
98
66
106
139
85
369
210
180
590
60
199
600

145
65
165
4,023
603
101
157
224
2,262
500
141
1,256
3,124
359
716
5,110
325
98
66
177
432
85
369
210
180
590
60
199
600

1
1
1
41
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1

$88
$57
$56
$1,503
$76
$71
$93
$120
$479
$124
$87
$528
$650
$173
$116
$2,055
$89
$70
$57
$73
$86
$64
$177
$114
$102
$265
$55
$110
$269

Internet (con't)

Roman Catholic Church Diocese of Phoenix
RR Donnelley
Ryley Carlock & Applewhite
SagePoint Financial
Schenker, Inc.
Scottsdale Christian Academy
Scottsdale Cultural Council
Scottsdale Insurance Company
Scottsdale Resort & Conference Center
Sears Holding Mgmt Corp
Semiconductor Components Industries, dba On Semi
Senergy Petroleum, LLC
Shamrock Foods Company
Shasta Industries, Inc.
Sheraton Downtown Phoenix
SHPS Inc., dba Carewise Health Inc.
Sigma Alimentos., dba Bar-S-Foods
Silicon Valley Bank
Sitewire
SmartHealth, Inc.
Smith Food & Drug Stores - Fry's Food Store
SmithGroup JJR
Snell & Wilmer, LLP
Sodexo America, LLC
Sports and Entertainment Services., LLC
Sprouts Farmers Market
SRP
St. Joseph's Hospital
St. Mary's Catholic High School

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

110
363
88
148
100
83
77
1,067
50
505
790
49
536
104
100
63
103
239
61
325
13,140
115
421
15
25
295
4,347
1,686
57

110
363
88
148
100
83
77
1,067
255
505
790
94
1,317
104
325
63
103
239
61
325
13,140
115
421
252
270
295
4,347
4,150
64

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
94
1
1
1
1
1
14
1
1

$74
$175
$66
$89
$70
$64
$61
$454
$51
$231
$344
$50
$243
$72
$70
$56
$72
$125
$55
$160
$5,237
$76
$198
$37
$41
$148
$1,753
$699
$53

Internet (con't)

Standard Aero
Staples Inc.
Starwood Hotels & Resorts
State Bar of Arizona
State Farm Insurance
Stryker Sustainability Solutions
Sun Valley Lodge, Inc.
SunWest Federal Credit Union
SXC Health Solutions, Inc., dba Catamaran
Symphony Health Solutions
Take Charge America
Tempe School District
Tenet Health Care - Phoenix Baptist Hospital
Terros
Tessenderlo Kerley, Inc.
The Arizona Republic
The Art Institute of Phoenix
The Boulders
The Cavanagh Law Firm
The Endurance International Group
The Gap - Western Fulfillment Center
The Hartford
The Musical Instrument Museum
The Tech Group
The Westin Kierland Resort Spa
Tiedemann Globe
Tiffany & Bosco, P.A.
TLK Group
Tolleson Union High School Dist.

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

53
70
250
97
4,650
253
60
65
250
170
105
1,391
34
180
96
1,109
159
135
85
384
295
203
88
705
200
87
143
239
762

53
201
250
97
4,650
253
73
65
250
170
105
1,511
620
180
96
1,109
159
473
85
384
295
203
88
705
422
87
143
239
851

1
1
1
1
6
2
1
1
1
1
1
19
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
2
1
7

$52
$59
$130
$69
$1,873
$131
$55
$57
$130
$98
$72
$582
$44
$102
$69
$470
$94
$84
$64
$183
$148
$111
$66
$310
$110
$65
$87
$125
$333

Internet (con't)

Total Transit
Toyota Financial Service
Translational Genomics Research Institute
Travelers Insurance
Triumph Engines Tempe
TriVita
TSA (Homeland Security)
TSYS Acquiring Solutions
UA College of Medicine - Phoenix
United Dairymen of Arizona
UnitedHealth Group
University of Advancing Technology
Univision
US Air Force - Luke AFB
US Dept of Interior- Bureau of Indian Affairs
US Dept of Interior-Bureau of Reclamation
US Dept of Treasury-Internal Revenue Service
US Foods Tempe
USAA Phoenix Office
USDA Forest Service, Tonto National Forest
UTC Aerospace Systems
UTC Aerospace Systems (Hamilton Sundstrand)
Valley Metro RPTA
Valley of the Sun United Way
Vanguard
Virgo Publishing, LLC
Voya Investment Management
VZB Communications Services
Washington Elementary School District

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

380
497
187
120
93
150
1,130
495
199
50
3,718
81
61
3,547
126
73
75
535
3,000
76
467
576
160
120
2,555
99
210
81
1,886

380
497
187
120
93
150
1,130
495
199
250
3,718
81
61
3,547
126
73
482
535
3,000
76
617
576
160
120
2,555
99
210
81
1,886

1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
21

$181
$228
$105
$78
$68
$90
$479
$227
$110
$51
$1,504
$63
$55
$1,436
$81
$60
$61
$243
$1,219
$61
$216
$259
$94
$78
$1,043
$70
$114
$63
$778

Internet (con't)

Wells Fargo and Company
West Business Services
West Valley Hospital
Western Refining
Western Regional Medical Center
Western Window Systems
Westin Phoenix Downtown
Willis of Arizona, Inc.
Wist Office Products
WorldatWork
Xerox Business Services, FKA ACS
Yelp Inc.
Yodle, Inc.
Young's Market Company of Arizona

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

9,535
324
681
350
681
50
35
115
29
108
97
801
174
172
302,585

9,535
324
681
350
681
230
124
115
55
108
97
801
174
273
325,633

20
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,030

$3,809
$159
$301
$169
$301
$51
$45
$76
$42
$74
$69
$348
$100
$99

$131,927

Internet - Students

Arizona College Total
Arizona State University Total
Deer Valley Unified School District
Dysart School
Grand Canyon University
Maricopa County Comm. College Dist.
Midwestern University
Paradise Valley Unified School Dist.
Phoenix Country Day School
The Art Institute of Phoenix
Tolleson Union High School Dist.
UA College of Medicine - Phoenix
University of Advancing Technology

Intranet
Internet - Employees
Internet - Students
E-Survey Total

Number of
Employees

Total Number

Sites

Savings Cost

using E-survey

of Employees

E-surveyed

to TRP

311
51,713
5,439
7,438
900
39,863
1,500
4,941
115
999
5,149
200
360
118,928

311
51,713
5,439
7,438
900
39,863
1,500
4,941
115
999
5,149
200
360
118,928

1
1
5
4
1
14
1
5
1
1
5
1
1
41

$47,520

128
1,030
41
1,199

$17,171
$131,927
$47,520
$196,618

42,406
302,585
118,928
463,919

42,451
325,633
118,928
487,012

$154
$20,519
$2,186
$2,978
$387
$15,825
$625
$1,988
$76
$427
$2,071
$110
$173

SURVEY FORM METHODOLOGY
Maricopa County Regional Trip Reduction Program
Fiscal Year 2014 - 2015

Introduction:

The Maricopa County Regional Trip Reduction Program (TRP) has completed its twenty-sixth
program year. During FY15, the TRP modified its methodology to accommodate its latest
version of the survey questionnaire. Each program year, new methodologies, procedures and
definitions are implemented to improve the overall quality of the TRP.

Response Rate:

Employers and schools affected by the TRP conduct a trip reduction survey annually and are
required to achieve a minimum response rate of 60% per site. The response rate is calculated
based on the number of questionnaires returned to the TRP divided by the number of surveys
requested. An employee site not achieving the minimum response rate is required to re-survey.
If that site does not achieve the minimum response rate on the re-survey, the non-respondents
are counted as single occupant commuters. Student sites do not have to re-survey if they do
not achieve the minimum response rate, nor do they incur a statistical penalty for nonrespondents.

Program Year:

The TRP’s method for measuring employers’ participation is based on the employer’s site
program year. This methodology permits the aggregation of employment sites based on
program year.

For purposes of maintaining consistency and tracking a company’s historical data from one
year to the next, data gathered for a company is based upon the company’s anniversary date.
The anniversary date is less likely to fluctuate for a company than the summary analysis sent
date. This allows TRP the capability to track the same companies and their results for any given
time period with greater accuracy.

Valid Surveys:

Three questions from the TRP survey are necessary to constitute a valid questionnaire. A valid
response to question #1 is used to verify that an employee reports to the worksite three or
more days per week; question #3 validates the mode used by the commuter and calculates the
SOV rate; and question #6 is needed to calculate the SOV miles traveled rate. Currently, the
maximum one-way distances that exclude questionnaires from statistical analysis are:

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
Annual Report --- July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

Mode of Transportation

Maximum One-way Distance (Miles)

Drive alone (SOV)
Carpool
Vanpool
Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV)
Bus (Public)
Bus (School)
Light Rail
Bike
Walk

Employees Site
150
150
150
150
75
n/a
35
50
10

Student Sites
75
n/a
n/a
75
25
25
25
10
6

Establishing SOV Targets:
SOV trip and mile targets are established to give employers their SOV reduction goals for the
following year and in subsequent years. Effective July 1, 1994, employer’s annual SOV
reduction goals increased from 5% to 10% for the first five target years. SOV targets for the
sixth year and subsequent program years are 5% annually.

Site Analysis:
Two indexes, the SOV trip and SOVMT rates, are used to measure the amount of SOV
reductions per employment/student site. SOV trips are calculated from question #1 and #3
on the TRP questionnaire. The formula for this calculation is:
SOV Trip Rates:
SOV Trips

=

Drive alone trips + Penalty trips 1

Total Trips

=

SOV trips + AFV trips +Carpool trips + Bus trips + Bike trips + Light
Rail trips + Walk trips + Vanpool trips + Telecommuting trips + CWW
trips

SOV Trip Rate =

SOV trips
Total trips

Assumptions used in measuring the SOV trip rate are: 1) calculating SOV trip rate allows for
changes (increase or decrease) in the work force population, 2) motorcycles are considered
SOV trips since their emission standards are higher than automobiles and 3) factoring carpool
and vanpool trips by the average vehicle occupancy (AVO) would adversely impact small
companies.

1 Penalty trips are non-respondents on a re-survey that are counted as single occupant commutes.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
Annual Report --- July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

The other index, the SOVMT rate is obtained by multiplying the number of one-way miles
traveled to the worksite (question #6) by the modes of transportation (question #1 and #3).
The total number of carpool or vanpool miles traveled weekly per site is factored by the AVO.
The AVO is calculated from question #5 on the TRP questionnaire. The formula for
computing the SOVMT rate is:
SOVMT Rate:
SOVMT

=

Drive alone miles + Penalty miles 1

Total VMT

=

SOVMT + AFV miles + (Carpool miles/AVO) + Bus miles + Bike
miles + Light Rail miles + Walk miles + (Vanpool miles/AVO) +
Telecommuting miles + CWW miles

SOVMT Rate =

SOVMT
Total VMT

The assumptions used in calculating the SOVMT rate are: 1) SOVMT rate allows for changes
in the work force population, 2) the SOVMT rate controls for changes in the location of
employment sites and/or employee residence, 3) the SOVMT rate accounts for
employees/students changing from an SOV mode of transportation to one of the main
alternative modes of transportation (carpool, vanpool or bus), as well as employees/students
changing to bike or walk modes of transportation and 4) factoring by AVO more accurately
measures the amount of miles traveled in carpools and vanpools to the worksite.

Accounting for Telecommuting and Compressed Work Week Schedules:
Telecommuting trips measure the number of days per week a respondent works at home
instead of traveling to the work site. Compressed work week schedules (CWW) measure the
number of respondents working a 4-day week (10-hour work days), 3-day week (12 hour work
days), alternating 3-day/4-day workweeks (36 hours one week, 48 hours the next week) and 80
hours in nine (9) days (9/80).
The assumptions used in accounting for CWW and telecommuting work schedules are 1)
telecommuters and CWW employees are SOV commuters; and 2) CWW work schedules and
telecommute trips are considered trips not taken; and 3) a commuter cannot live greater than
150 miles from their work site to be considered one of these types of alternative mode users.

1 Penalty miles are non-respondents that are counted as single occupant commutes.
Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
Annual Report --- July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

Accounting for Alternative Fuel Vehicle trips and miles:
Alternative Fuel Vehicles (AFV) are given credit for trips and miles when a respondent selects
a fuel type from question #4 on the survey. Credit criteria were initially calibrated with the
assistance of Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). Credit for AFV types will be adjusted as criteria for the fuel type will be
recalibrated each year.
The assumptions used in accounting for AFV trips and miles are: 1) AFV users are SOV
commuters and 2) if another alternative mode was marked on the survey, credit is given to that
mode.
Below is a current list of AFVs for this year that TRP gives credit for trips and miles to
employers.
Alternative Mode

Calculated Credit

Electric
Hybrid (gas/electric)
Hydrogen
Natural Gas

Jul 2014 – Jun 2015
1.0
0.453
1.0
0.453

The on-road emissions model used to calculate miles per pound for Light Duty
Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV) was updated this reporting period by the EPA. It officially
replaced the previous emissions model, MOBILE6.2, with the Motor Vehicle Emission
Simulator (MOVES2010b) model, beginning January 2014. The new model continues
to calculate how many miles driven it takes to generate one-pound of pollution for a
standard on-road vehicle.
For this reporting period the TRP conversion rate for Natural Gas vehicles is derived
from the MOBILE6.2 model. The EPA is still making adjustments to their model to
calculate emission rates for Light Duty CNG Vehicles (LD NGV) and plan to release
the final version using the MOVES2014 model. The LD NGV calculation is used to
measure the partial credit amount given for commuters who select those AFV’s that
qualify using those modes.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
Annual Report --- July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

Comparing Change in SOV Rates:
The SOV trip and SOVMT rates obtained in the current year are compared with the SOV
rates obtained in the previous year for each employment/student site. Each employer and site
is given an employer code and a site number that make it possible to compare sites from year
to year. The SOV trip and SOVMT rates are compared annually by using the following
formula:
SOV Rate Current Year - SOV Rate Previous Year
SOV Rate Previous Year

Aggregate Analysis:
Aggregate models used to measure the overall impact of the TRP on reducing SOV trips or
SOV miles are very similar to the models used to measure employment sites. Aggregate
analyses are performed for quarterly reports, year-end reports and special studies. The
guidelines for including employee and student sites into aggregate analyses are: 1) an
employee/student site must be available for all years under investigation and 2) affected sites
are analyzed separately for employee and student populations.

Aggregate Models for SOV Rates:
SOV Trip Rate:
SOV Trips

=

Drive alone trips + Penalty trips

Total Trips

=

SOV trips + AFV trips + Carpool trips + Bus trips + Bike trips + Light
Rail trips + Walk trips + Vanpool trips + Telecommute trips + CWW
trips

SOV Trip Rate =

SOV Trips
Total Trips

SOVMT Rate:
SOVMT

=

Drive alone miles + Penalty miles

Total VMT

=

SOVMT+ AFV miles + (Carpool miles/AVO) + Bus miles + Bike
miles + Light Rail miles + Walk miles + (Vanpool miles/AVO) +
Telecommute miles + CWW miles

SOVMT Rate =

SOVMT
Total VMT

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
Annual Report --- July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015

Definitions:
Alternative Fueled Vehicle (AFV) - a motor vehicle that is a hybrid, electric, uses biodiesel,
hydrogen or natural gas propane instead of conventional or diesel fuel.
Carpool - Rides shared in private automobiles by two or more people, on a continual basis,
regardless of their relationship to each other or cost-sharing agreements. Vehicle can
include, but not limited to, sedan-like vehicle, SUV or mini-van.
Commute Alternatives - Carpooling, vanpooling, making use of the public transit system,
bicycling or walking as commute modes for traveling to and from work.
Compressed Work Week (CWW) - Management reschedules the normal five-day, fortyhour week to longer hours per day but fewer days per week.
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) - A motor vehicle occupied by two or more people.
Single-Occupant Vehicle (SOV) - A motor vehicle occupied by one person commuting to
work/school. This definition also includes commuting to work on a motorcycle.
Telecommuting - The use of telecommunications technology to transport information
rather than people to the work place. Generally speaking, telecommuting is simply working
at the home instead of going to the work site.
Vanpool - The prearranged membership of a group whose members are picked up by a van
at specific points and are taken to common or nearby employment sites, then returned to
the pick-up point(s) after the end of the workday, usually for a monthly fare.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) - The total one-way distance traveled in miles by all motor
vehicles of a specified group at an employment site.

Maricopa County Regional Travel Reduction Program
Annual Report --- July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015