Federal Transit Administration: Progress and Challenges in Implementing and Evaluating the Job Access and Reverse Commute Program

In 2009, GAO reported that state and local authorities cited multiple challenges in implementing the Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) Program. A common concern was that, overall, the effort required to obtain JARC funds places an administrative burden on recipients because the effort is disproportionate to the relatively small amount of funding available. One challenge cited by recipients (e.g., transit agencies or states) was that FTA's delay in issuing final guidance and the process to identify designated recipients reduced the time available to secure funds before the funds expired. Moreover, some recipients found the guidance vague and overly broad. In addition, although recipients considered the coordinated planning process beneficial, many cited factors that hindered coordination, including a lack of resources and the reluctance of some stakeholders to participate. Some recipients also expressed concerns about identifying stable sources of matching funds and duplicative efforts in administering JARC with other FTA programs. These challenges delayed applications for funds and project implementation, and contributed to a lapse of 14 percent of the funds available in fiscal year 2006 at the end of fiscal year 2008. FTA was taking steps to address these challenges, and noted that some challenges, such as the amount of funding and flexibility in using JARC funds, were rooted in statute and would need to be addressed by Congress in the next surface transportation reauthorization. GAO recommended that the Secretary of DOT direct the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to determine what actions FTA or Congress could take to address the challenges agencies have encountered, such as providing more specific guidance to assist large urbanized areas with jurisdiction over small urbanized or rural areas, or suggesting that Congress consider consolidating the application processes for JARC and other programs with similar requirements to reduce the administrative burden. Rather than identify actions to be taken, FTA took action to address the challenges agencies have encountered. In 2011, we confirmed that FTA provided more guidance and technical assistance to help recipients address challenges associated with the JARC program and continued to work with individual recipients that encountered problems. Additionally, FTA's input to the President's Budget for fiscal year 2012 proposed that Congress consolidate the JARC program with two similar small formula programs (the New Freedom and the Elderly and Individuals with Disabilities programs) to streamline administration and provide more flexibility at the local level. Congress did consolidate these three programs when it passed the new surface transportation legislation in 2012 by merging JARC with two other larger programs (urbanized and rural area grants) and combining the New Freedom and Elderly and Individuals with Disabilities programs into a new grant to enhance the mobility of seniors and individuals with disabilities. As a result, recipients' administrative burden should be reduced and they should have sufficient guidance to apply for these programs in a timely manner. Further, FTA should be able to award more funds from these programs to implement additional projects and accordingly, less funds will lapse in the future.

In 2009, GAO reported that Federal Transit Administration (FTA) had improved its approach for evaluating the Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) program since 2000 and had two studies under way to evaluate the program under SAFETEA-LU. One study, under contract with the University of Illinois (UIC), was to evaluate the program's economic impacts using data from a survey of JARC service users, program managers, and coordinated human services transportation plan participants. However, this study was to use a methodology similar to that used in a prior study which had limitations in the survey instrument design and data analysis. FTA also did not have a comprehensive process in place to assess whether its researchers use generally accepted survey design and data analysis methodologies. Therefore, GAO recommended that FTA ensure that program evaluations use generally accepted survey design and data analysis methodologies by conducting a peer review of current and future program evaluations, including the current study of the JARC program. In response, UIC's 2011 report on the results of the study indicated that the surveys UIC used were reviewed by an independent, professional survey review committee, pretested three different times and revised several times as a result of the pretests. Additionally, FTA indicated that the study was peer reviewed by an expert in sampling and design of experiments. As a result, FTA ensured that the evaluation of the JARC program used generally accepted survey design and data analysis practices addressing the limitations that would have negatively affected the assessment of the program.