Which transport option reaches the intended households?
Compare total reach, local uptake and cost under the pilot’s goals.
The question
You compare two local transport options in Australia. The pilot aims for at least 40% of the 800 households in a limited-service area to start using the service. The cost cap is AUD 110,000.
| Fare discount A | Access voucher B | |
|---|---|---|
| New households using the service | 1000 | 760 |
| Of those, in the limited-service area | 240 | 360 |
| Cost in AUD | 100,000 | 105,000 |
Count each household once. The total already includes the households in the limited-service area.
“Which option would you recommend, and what trade-off would you give the decision maker?”
Not saved by this site. Your browser may restore text when you navigate back.
A strong answer, step by step
Open each step in turn. This is one strong answer, not the only one.
Step 1: State the criteria
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Use 320 local households as the minimum and check the cost cap.
The strong move. The local target is a separate decision criterion. It uses the 800 households in that area.
Select the option with the most households overall.
Tempting, but it misses something. The pilot sets a specific local uptake target as well as a budget.
See how a strong candidate says it
“40% of 800 is 320 households. I’d compare how many households each option reaches in the area, how many it reaches overall and whether it fits the budget.”
Why it works: The local target is a separate decision criterion. It uses the 800 households in that area.
Step 2: Compare the first estimates
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Recommend B while showing A’s greater overall reach.
The strong move. Both options are within budget. The local reach makes B the initial recommendation.
Recommend A because its total count is higher and its cost is lower.
Tempting, but it misses something. A reaches only 240 of the 800 local households. The decision calls for at least 320.
See how a strong candidate says it
“A reaches 30% of households in the limited-service area. B reaches 45%. B meets the target and fits the budget. A reaches 240 more households overall.”
Why it works: Both options are within budget. The local reach makes B the initial recommendation.
Step 3: Check the access barrier
The delivery team finds 80 of B’s expected local households cannot use online intake. They would drop from both counts. Assisted intake would cost AUD 5,000 and is expected to restore 60 of those households.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Check B with assisted intake against the local target and the full cost.
The strong move. The 80 lost and 60 restored households are both in the local group. Each change also affects the total.
Keep the original estimate of 360 local households for B.
Tempting, but it misses something. The intake review found that 80 of those households need a different route. The assisted option is expected to restore 60.
See how a strong candidate says it
“Without help, B falls to 280 local households, or 35%. With assisted intake, B reaches 340 local households, or 42.5%, and 740 overall. The revised cost is AUD 110,000.”
Why it works: The 80 lost and 60 restored households are both in the local group. Each change also affects the total.
Step 4: Give the trade-off
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Give the decision maker the two reach figures and the delivery condition.
The strong move. The recommendation identifies who gains, what the plan gives up and what must be confirmed.
Report only the 42.5% estimate because it meets the target.
Tempting, but it misses something. The decision maker also needs the lower overall reach and the full budget commitment.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I’d recommend B with assisted intake if the delivery owner confirms the plan. Compared with A, B is expected to reach 100 more local households and 260 fewer overall. It uses the full budget.”
Why it works: The recommendation identifies who gains, what the plan gives up and what must be confirmed.
The answer, in short
- Decision
- Recommend B with assisted intake, subject to confirmation from the delivery owner.
- Because
- It reaches 340 local households and fits the AUD 110,000 cap.
- What would change it
- A change in the assisted intake cost or expected uptake would reopen the comparison.
Common traps
- Using total uptake as a substitute for local uptake.
- Adding the local group to a total that already includes it.
Check your answer
- I calculated the local threshold.
- I compared both reach figures.
- I included the access barrier and support cost.
- I stated the trade-off and condition.
Last reviewed Nov 11, 2026