However, about 14 percent of fiscal year 2006 funds lapsed— primarily in small urbanized areas—for various reasons, including delays  in fulfilling administrative requirements under SAFETEA-LU. FTA Is Making Progress in Awarding Fiscal Year 2006 through 2008 Funds, Although Some Fiscal Year 2006 Funds Lapsed

Overall, FTA has awarded almost half of the apportioned $436.6 million  available for fiscal years 2006 through 2008 (about 48 percent) to 49 states  and 131 of 152 large urbanized areas, as of March 2009. Recipients Plan to Use Awarded Funds Primarily to Operate Existing Transit Services

Recipients have used or plan to use JARC funds primarily to operate or  expand existing transit routes in an effort to target low-income  populations. JARC Recipients Report Multiple Challenges in Implementing the Program

Recipients and local authorities we interviewed cited multiple challenges  throughout the process for implementing JARC-funded projects. Although  many of these recipients and local authorities have addressed these  challenges and have received JARC funding, a common concern we heard  is that, overall, the amount of effort required to obtain JARC funds is  disproportionate to the relatively small amount of funding available  compared to other transit programs. Because the process of identifying designated recipients in some areas  took more than 2 years after SAFETEA-LU was enacted, it reduced the  time available for those areas to conduct a coordinated planning process,  develop a coordinated human services transportation plan, conduct a  competitive selection process, and apply to FTA for funds before the  September 30, 2008, deadline to award fiscal year 2006 funds. Although Recipients Considered Coordination Beneficial, Multiple Factors Make It Difficult

Many state and designated recipient officials we interviewed considered  the coordinated planning process beneficial and worthwhile. JARC Program Recipients Cite Benefits, but FTA’s Plans for Current Evaluations May Have Limitations

Although FTA has not completed an evaluation of the JARC program  under SAFETEA-LU, recipients we spoke with indicated that projects have  benefited low-income individuals by providing a means to get to work. FTA has improved its approach for evaluating the program since 2000 and  currently has two studies under way to evaluate the JARC program under  SAFETEA-LU. However, both studies—one on performance measures and  another on the program’s economic impacts—may have limitations that  could affect FTA’s assessment of the program. However, limitations inherent in the performance measures could affect  the usefulness of this evaluation:    Actual or estimated number of rides (as measured by one-way trips):  According to designated recipients and other state and local agency  officials we spoke with, determining the number of rides to access  jobs presents challenges because individuals use fixed route  services for many reasons in addition to traveling to work, including  shopping and medical appointments. CES and  TranSystems will use this information to estimate the number of jobs  accessed. As of May 2009, researchers were in the process of finalizing  the survey instruments for this study. Nevertheless, FTA does not have a comprehensive process in place to  ensure that evaluations of the impact of the JARC program use generally  accepted survey design and data analysis methodologies. Conclusions

FTA has made progress in awarding JARC funds since Congress passed  SAFETEA-LU in 2005, although FTA’s delay in issuing final guidance and  other challenges contributed to a lapse in some fiscal year 2006 funds. Although FTA and recipients are becoming accustomed to the new  formula program and its requirements—which could lessen the severity of  these challenges in the future—recipients told us that they continue to  face challenges in a number of circumstances, such as when:    designated recipients for large urbanized areas have jurisdiction  over small urbanized and/or rural areas and when the service  provided by an individual transit provider overlaps two or more of  these areas;    designated recipients are responsible for ensuring that organizations  that do not traditionally receive FTA funding comply with FTA  requirements;  local agencies, particularly those in rural areas, have limited staff,  funding, and/or expertise needed to update coordinated public  transit-human services transportation plans; and    JARC requirements duplicate the requirements for other programs,  such as New Freedom and Section 5310. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

We are mandated to evaluate the Job Access and Reverse Commute  (JARC) program every 2 years under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,  Efficient Transportation Equity Act-A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). This report addresses (1) the extent to which FTA has awarded available  JARC funds for fiscal years 2006 through 2008 and how recipients are  using the funds since the changes went into effect under SAFETEA-LU, (2)  the challenges recipients have faced in implementing the program, and (3)  how FTA plans to evaluate the JARC program.
Why GAO Did This Study

Established in 1998, the Job Access and Reverse Commute Program (JARC)-administered by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)--awards grants to states and localities to provide transportation to help low-income individuals access jobs. In 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act--A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) reauthorized the program and made changes, such as allocating funds by formula to large and small urban and rural areas through designated recipients, usually transit agencies and states. SAFETEA-LU also required GAO to periodically review the program. This second report under the mandate examines (1) the extent to which FTA has awarded JARC funds for fiscal years 2006 through 2008, and how recipients are using the funds; (2) challenges faced by recipients in implementing the program; and (3) FTA's plans to evaluate the program. For this work, GAO analyzed data and interviewed officials from FTA, nine states, and selected localities.

What GAO Found

FTA is making progress in awarding funds and has awarded about 48 percent of the $436.6 million in JARC funds apportioned for fiscal years 2006 through 2008 to 49 states and 131 of 152 large urbanized areas. Recipients plan to use the funds primarily to operate transit services. However, about 14 percent of fiscal year 2006 funds lapsed. According to FTA officials, these funds lapsed for several reasons. For example, some applicants did not meet administrative requirements in time to apply for funds. FTA officials are working with states and localities to reduce the amount of funds that lapse in the future. Recipients plan to use 65 percent of fiscal year 2006 funds to operate transit services, 28 percent for capital projects, and 7 percent for administrative costs. States and local authorities GAO interviewed cited multiple challenges in implementing the JARC program; a common concern is that, overall, the effort required to obtain JARC funds is disproportionate to the relatively small amount of funding available. One challenge cited by recipients 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. In addition, although recipients considered the coordinated planning process beneficial, many cited factors that hindered coordination, including lack of resources and the reluctance of some stakeholders to participate. Moreover, although the JARC program requires human service providers to be included as stakeholders, other transportation planning requirements do not, complicating the coordinated planning process. Some designated recipients also expressed concerns about identifying stable sources of matching funds and duplicative efforts in administering JARC with other FTA programs. These challenges have delayed applications for funds and project implementation, and contributed to the lapse in fiscal year 2006 funds. Although FTA has not completed an evaluation of the JARC program under SAFETEA-LU, recipients we spoke with indicated that projects have benefited low-income individuals by providing a means to get to work. Since 2000, FTA has refined its approach for evaluating the program and currently has two studies under way to evaluate the JARC program under SAFETEA-LU. However, both studies may have limitations that could affect FTA's assessment of the program. One of these studies--due in September 2009--will evaluate projects using FTA's performance measures; specifically, the number of rides provided and number of jobs accessed. However, collecting reliable data for these measures is problematic, particularly for the number of jobs accessed. The other study--due in the spring of 2010--will include results of a survey of JARC recipients and individuals using JARC services and will focus on the program's impact on those using the services. However, this study will use a methodology similar to that used in a prior study which had limitations in the survey instrument design and data analysis. FTA does not have a comprehensive process in place to assess whether its researchers use generally accepted survey design and data analysis methodologies.