Fix: the feed lists no technical contact

Published: 3 July 2026. Last reviewed: 3 July 2026.

Code: scorecard_no_feed_contact

What this means

feed_info.txt is present but has neither feed_contact_email nor feed_contact_url, so there is no address to reach the people who maintain the feed. These fields are optional in the spec, but they are the standard way to say "if something looks wrong with this data, here is who to tell."

Why it matters

App makers, state data programs, and trip planners do sometimes spot problems in a feed before the agency does. With no contact, they have nobody to email, so the problem sits unreported and the feed stays broken longer than it needed to. A contact turns a silent failure into a quick heads-up. It costs one field and saves the round of detective work someone would otherwise do to find you.

How to fix it

Add a contact to feed_info.txt:

• feed_contact_email: a monitored address, ideally a role inbox like gtfs@youragency.org rather than one person, so it survives staff changes.
• or feed_contact_url: a page or form where issues can be reported.

Either one satisfies the check; an email is usually simplest. Most scheduling tools expose this in the same export settings that write the rest of feed_info.txt.

How long it usually takes

One field, set once. Using a role inbox instead of a personal address is the only judgement call.

Authoritative rule

This scorecard finding maps to the canonical MobilityData GTFS Validator notice missing_feed_contact_email_and_url, so the finding can be checked against the ecosystem's shared rule text. Read the authoritative rule for missing_feed_contact_email_and_url in the GTFS Validator rules. (opens on an external site)