The Determination of How Federal Section 5316 Funds Were Used Under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21); The Degree to which JARC and the New Freedom Activities Are Being Continued Under MAP-21 and the FAST Act; JARC and the New Freedom Act Then and Now

This report documents the results of an analysis of the differences between the uses, administration, and management of the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA's) Section 5316 Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) and Section 5317 New Freedom programs under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), as well as the degree to which JARC and New Freedom activities were funded once the programs were eliminated under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). JARC was transformed from a discretionary funding program under TEA-21 to a formula driven program under SAFETEA-LU before being eliminated altogether in 2012 under MAP-21. Changes in funding levels and distribution mechanisms as well as changes in program and project administration requirements have had a significant impact on the JARC program and JARC-funded projects. This report includes a review of historical (since 1999) Section 5316 funding allocation data by state, and, more importantly, compares the distribution of funding to large urban, small urban, and rural areas under TEA- 21 and SAFETEA-LU. This report also provides the history of the New Freedom program as well as an analysis of New Freedom funding and uses since its authorization in 2006 under SAFETEA-LU. The research is based upon a detailed review of available grants data, as well as information collected from two national surveys and interviews and focus groups with state department of transportation (DOT) and other program stakeholders. The research found that a majority of state DOT representatives preferred the formula distribution of JARC funding under SAFETEA-LU or its consolidation with FTA’s Section 5307 Urbanized Area and Section 5311 Rural Area Formula programs under MAP-21 to the discretionary funding model provided by TEA-21. This report further finds that while state DOTs who participated in the research favored MAP-21’s consolidation of the New Freedom program with the Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities program, transit agencies in urban and rural areas and program administrators in urbanized areas tended to disapprove of the change. Finally, the research finds that New Freedom-type projects have been more successful than former JARC projects at securing funding through their MAP-21 (and now, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act) programs.


  • English

Media Info

  • Media Type: Digital/other
  • Edition: Final Report
  • Features: Figures; Tables;
  • Pagination: 56p

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 01671260
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Report/Paper Numbers: NCHRP Project 20-65, Task 59-61
  • Files: TRIS
  • Created Date: May 9 2018 3:13PM