CPS transportation chief reports 92% yellow‑bus on‑time rate, outlines routing, equity and budget pressures
Loading...
Summary
Cincinnati Public Schools Chief Operations Officer Chris Burkhart told the board that yellow‑bus on‑time performance is 92% and outlined transit mapping, Metro pass usage and rising special‑transportation costs; trustees pressed for grade‑level data, cost‑per‑school figures and equity analyses.
Chris Burkhart, Cincinnati Public Schools' chief operations officer, told the board on April 6 that the district’s yellow‑bus on‑time rate is 92% and that anchor‑time performance (arrivals 20 minutes before school) sits at about 79.7 percent.
Burkhart said GPS reporting remains strong — about 96% — and described the district’s shift toward tracking what students actually do on a day‑to‑day basis rather than only planned routes. He said the district has issued roughly 12,000 Metro passes this school year (about 10,000 for CPS students and 2,000 for non‑CPS schools) and that of the 12,000 passes, roughly 7,000 are direct trips from home to school while about 5,000 require a transfer.
"So you'll see our, on time percentage for yellow bus is at 92%," Burkhart told trustees. "Your first question is gonna be why did it go down, and my first answer is winter." He also walked trustees through example maps (Schroeder, Hartwell, Ethel Taylor) showing where students live in relation to their schools and whether trips route through Government Square transit center.
Burkhart described operational steps taken at Government Square — more partner presence and curtailed pass windows — and said overall daily Metro taps average about 10,000 (roughly 5,000 morning, 5,000 afternoon). He added the district makes automated calls to families when students appear to be routed through a transit center who may not need to be there.
Board members pressed for more disaggregated data. Board member Crossett asked how many students the 130 additional non‑CPS schools represent; Burkhart said he did not have an exact figure but confirmed about 2,000 of those pass holders were high school students and offered to provide further grade‑level breakdowns. Trustees also asked for cost‑per‑school transportation figures, comparisons of Metro versus yellow‑bus expenditures, and the effect of special‑education transportation needs on overall costs.
Burkhart said district transportation spending is under pressure: the team discussed a $44 million ballpark for the coming year but said the figure remains sensitive to late additions (charters or nonpublic schools that request service after April 1) and special‑transportation demand. He noted the district must meet prescribed pick‑up and drop‑off windows or face escalating state sanctions that begin with written warnings and can escalate to reductions in daily funding for sustained failures.
Trustees framed much of the conversation around equity and corridor planning. Multiple trustees asked whether the corridor model is sufficiently robust to reduce long rides for students who choose citywide programs; Superintendent Murphy and Burkhart said the corridor approach is in early stages and that the district plans to refine route modeling and data gathering as routing for the next year proceeds through April–July and finalizes by August 1.
What happens next: Burkhart told trustees that more detailed routing data will be available as the district completes routing in June and July, and board members requested follow‑up materials showing grade‑level breakdowns for Metro riders, cost per school (disaggregated by Metro vs yellow bus), and an accounting of special‑transportation and extracurricular fleet costs.
