Skip to Main Content


A Review of Transportation Services Provided by State Agencies
January 2001

REPORT (PDF)     SUMMARY (PDF)

Members of the General Assembly requested that we conduct a review of state agencies that provide transportation to their clients. The requesters were concerned about transportation costs incurred by these agencies and their use of professional staff to drive clients. The requesters also asked us to develop a formula to calculate agency transportation costs. Our findings are summarized as follows.

  • Generally, state agencies have not tracked their transportation costs and the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) has made little effort to collect cost data from agencies. Without adequate cost data, the state cannot make informed decisions about the cost-effectiveness of agency as compared to contracted transportation services.
  • We concluded that a full resource cost allocation method should be used to calculate agency transportation costs. Under this method, all costs associated with client transportation would be accounted for, regardless of whether they are actually incurred by the agency. At a minimum, the following costs would be included — labor, fringe benefits, administrative overhead, capital costs, maintenance, insurance, and gas, oil, and tires.
  • Agencies use different methods to bill their transportation cost. The use of different methodologies does not allow a comparison of transportation costs among offices within the same agency or between different agencies. In addition, the rate at which agencies reimburse individuals for the use of personal vehicles varies both among and within agencies.
  • Although some state agencies use staff whose duties do not primarily involve driving to transport clients, the agencies do not know the extent to which staff is used. When agencies do not account for staff time spent driving, transportation costs are not accurate, and a comparison of costs is not possible.
  • SCDOT has not complied with state requirements to coordinate transportation services. SCDOT has not required entities to submit data necessary for coordination planning, and has not analyzed the results of demonstration projects implemented to assist in statewide coordination efforts. The lack of coordinated services may result in higher costs. Therefore, it is possible that many people who need transportation services may not receive them.
  • Based on available information, we were unable to determine if a statewide transportation authority would be more beneficial than the present regional transportation authorities (RTAs) which generally serve particular counties. South Carolina does not have transportation coverage in every county and the counties with some degree of coverage may not necessarily be served by an RTA.
  • SCDOT has not monitored the expenditure of federal mass transit funds distributed to transit providers as required by federal and state law.
  • From FY 97-98 to FY 00-01, based on unverified self-reported data, SCDOT awarded approximately $7.5 million to transit operators who provide services in rural areas. The agency’s reliance upon self-reported information provides minimal assurance that the data is accurate.
  • As of April 2000, SCDOT had used only $12,328 of $285,173 (4%) of federal funds allocated to train transit providers in rural areas. Because the agency did not use these funds, additional training funds of $208,081 were withheld from SCDOT.
  • As of April 2000, the mass transit division of SCDOT had met only one of its four primary goals. The agency had not reached the other three goals, and had revised the completion dates.
  • Three (20%) of the 15 employees in SCDOT’s mass transit division do not meet minimum education requirements for the positions they hold. In addition, SCDOT does not require documentation to verify applicant or employee educational credentials.