Microtransit Programs: Key Takeaways for Local Governments

“Microtransit” is an on-demand shuttle service that operates within a set geographic area. Instead of operating on a set schedule, these shuttles pick up and drop off riders on request.

In Washington, RCW 35.58.2795 outlines requirements for six-year public transportation plans, including provisions for microtransit services. The law defines "transit agency" broadly, encompassing city transit systems, county authorities, and other special purpose districts that operate public transportation.

Local governments and transit agencies use microtransit to fill gaps in other types of public transportation. Barriers like highways, long distances, or missing sidewalks may make it difficult for people to reach transit stops; instead, they could request a microtransit shuttle.

Agencies across Washington have adapted microtransit to different contexts. Some larger jurisdictions use microtransit in specific communities or to connect riders to major transit hubs. Others replace underperforming fixed routes. For instance, Ben Franklin Transit’s microtransit program Connect fills coverage gaps while allowing the agency to prioritize express routes.

As microtransit continues to emerge, local governments can learn from already-established examples. Kevin Futhey, Innovation Project Manager, Community Transit, and Sarah Streiffert, Specialized Transportation Administrator, Pierce Transit, spoke to me about their programs: Community Transit's Zip Shuttle in Snohomish County and Pierce Transit's Runner service.

Microtransit in Practice: Two Local Government Examples

"Microtransit is a way to fill in the gaps around a bus network and help people make those shorter trips to the grocery store, school, their job, the park,” said Futhey.

Of Community Transit’s Zip Shuttle customers, 20 to 30% of use microtransit specifically to connect to fixed-route transit, solving what Futhey calls "the first/last mile problem." Integration with the ORCA card system allows for easy transfers between microtransit and traditional transportation routes.

One of the most surprising findings for Community Transit has been the increased youth ridership on the microtransit program. While the Alderwood zone sees about 15% youth ridership, Lake Stevens and Darrington are approaching 70%, with Arlington at over 40%.

It helps that on microtransit, like on all public transportation, youth 18 and under ride free. "At Community Transit, we've heard from youth and parents that this is just helping them get out in their community, to before school and after school activities, to recreation, just giving them another way to get around town,” Futhey said.

Runner also helps riders reach transportation systems that were previously inaccessible. The shuttle allows customers to, for instance, "ride corner to corner within a zone, or curb to curb if they are not able walk to a set pickup stop,” Streiffert told me.

As their microtransit programs evolved, Futhey and Streiffert were able to share several key lessons that have emerged that they want to share with jurisdictions considering microtransit programs.

Engage Communities Before Launch

Community engagement before launching Zip Shuttle was important for Community Transit. Staffers spent considerable time in the community, developing community work groups and working with residents to identify important destinations. Input from community work group members later helped drive early ridership.

Futhey describes the process: "We listened to the community really closely about what their transportation barriers were and what kinds of solutions they might be interested in to overcome those barriers."

Community Transit predicted it would take a year to build strong ridership but saw customers respond quickly to the service and reached year-end ridership projections several months early.

Select Vendors Carefully

Community Transit changed vendors after its initial pilot in the Alderwood zone. Futhey notes that microtransit vendors must balance excellent customer experience with operational efficiency, which is challenging since microtransit uses smaller vehicles that sometimes move only one or two people at a time.

When evaluating vendors, consider the following:

• Proven track record: Futhey recommends choosing vendors that can "point to firm data on their operations and proven use cases in geographic contexts similar to yours."
• Geographic relevance: Agencies should ask vendors for performance data from similar communities, not just examples from localities with different characteristics.
• Dual focus on experience and efficiency: Vendors need to balance customer experience and efficiency through useful routing algorithms.
• Cultural alignment: Futhey emphasizes contractors need to "reflect your culture" by providing a similar level of safety, support, and care to your customers.

Educate the Public

Managing public expectations is a significant challenge for microtransit programs. Many people assume microtransit works like Uber or Lyft—a direct ride at bus prices. But as Streiffert explains, it is necessary to aggregate more people together to make the system cost-efficient. This means riders may experience detours as the vehicle picks up other passengers along the way.

Streiffert considers public education "the most important task going forward," especially when microtransit replaces a fixed bus route. Because "microtransit works differently than bus," agencies need to prepare the community in advance for how the system works.

Plan for Budget Sustainability

Pierce Transit has experienced challenges with budget and demand.

Streiffert notes: "Microtransit is not easily scalable. It takes significant investment to continue to meet the demand needs as ridership grows."

“We can see significant growth in the short time I've been involved. This is good in the fact that people are using it but also challenging because our budget can't keep up. So, not everyone that wants a ride can get one exactly in the timeframe they want,” she explains.

Key challenges include:

• Long-range planning: The main challenges include fitting the program into the agency's long-range plan and managing public perceptions of the service.
• Seat availability: Understanding seat availability is critical—it determines how many people can get a ride when they want one, versus having to wait or being unable to get a ride at all.
• Long-term sustainability: Agencies should be prepared for demand to grow once service launches and ensure they have adequate budget to sustain the program.

Learn from Other Jurisdictions

Community Transit hosts a statewide call every two months for transit agencies, nonprofits, and local government staff interested in microtransit. Futhey describes it as "an informal peer-to-peer call" where participants can learn from others working on or interested in microtransit from the public sector perspective.

Agencies from across the state and nonprofits attend to share updates about their microtransit work, discuss challenges, and exchange best practices. Futhey emphasizes that "there are no private sector folks on the call. So, it's not like a sales type environment. It's really just like peer-to-peer for public sector folks." (Interested parties can contact Kevin Futhey for more information)

Next Steps

Microtransit can address service gaps in communities where traditional fixed routes don't work well. The experiences of Community Transit and Pierce Transit show that implementing these programs requires careful vendor selection, community engagement, public education about how the service operates, and sustainable budget planning.

For jurisdictions considering microtransit, start by assessing local transportation barriers and how microtransit might fit within the existing transit network. Community Transit's peer-to-peer calls offer a way to learn from agencies already running these programs. As more Washington communities use microtransit, sharing experiences will help agencies build programs that serve their residents.