Bridge Conditions Have Improved, but the Impact of the HBP Is Difficult to Determine

		Bridge Conditions Have Improved but a Significant Number of Bridges Remain in Poor Condition

Of the 602,977 bridges on the nation’s roadways, one in four is classified as  deficient. Data indicate that the total number of deficient bridges has  decreased since 1998, even as the total number of bridges has increased. HBP’s Impact Is Difficult to Determine Due to Incomplete Information on Spending, Expansion of Bridge Project Eligibility, and Limitations in Bridge Condition Data

The impact of the federal investment in the HBP is difficult to measure in  part because there are no comprehensive and complementary data for  state and local spending on bridges. The lack of  comprehensive information on state and local spending makes it  impossible to (1) distinguish the impact of HBP funding from other  funding to improve bridge conditions and (2) determine the extent to  which states may be substituting increased HBP funding for state and local  funds that they would otherwise have spent on bridges. Therefore, simply measuring changes in the number of  structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges does not reflec full impact of the program, since these measures do not capture the  impact of the HBP investment in the other eligible activities—such as preventive maintenance—that do not necessarily result in an im reduction in the number of deficient bridges. by the HBP—on the overall condition of the nation’s bridges. The HBP Lacks Focus, Performance Measures, and Sustainability

As we reported in 2008, the HBP does not fully align with our principles  for re-examining surface transportation programs in that the bridge  program lacks focus, performance measures, and sustainability. First, HBP’s goals are not focused on a clearly identified federal interest. Over the years, the program’s statutory goals have expanded from  improving deficient bridges to supporting activities like seismic retrofitt and preventive maintenance, thus expanding eligibility for HBP funds to  include almost any bridge in the country. Since our 2008 report, FHWA reports that it has taken a number of steps to  work with Congress to address our recommendations. According to  FHWA, efforts are under way to incorporate the underlying principles we  developed to guide the re-examination of surface transportation programs,  such as the need for specific national goals and performance measures to  gauge progress toward national goals, encouraging states to use and share  best tools and practices, and aligning funding mechanisms to support  program goals. This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States.
Why GAO Did This Study

One in four bridges in the United States is either structurally deficient and in need of repair, or functionally obsolete and is not adequate for today's traffic. The Highway Bridge Program (HBP), the primary source of federal funding for bridges, provided about $7 billion to states in fiscal year 2010. This testimony addresses (1) the current state of the nation's bridges and the impacts of the HBP and (2) the extent to which the HBP aligns with principles GAO developed to guide the re-examination of surface transportation programs. This testimony is based on prior GAO reports, updated with bridge data and information provided by agency officials.

What GAO Found

There are over 600,000 bridges on the nation's roadways, of which one in four is deficient in some sense. Data indicate that the total number of deficient bridges has decreased over the past 12 years, even as the total number of bridges has increased, because of a reduction in the number of structurally deficient bridges. However, the impact of the federal investment in the HBP is difficult to measure, in part because there are no comprehensive and complementary data for state and local bridge spending. The lack of comprehensive information on state and local spending makes it impossible to (1) distinguish the impact of HBP funding from other funding to improve bridge conditions and (2) determine the extent to which states may be substituting increased HBP funding for state and local funds that they would otherwise have spent on bridges. Evaluating the impact of the HBP is important not only to understand the outcome of past spending but also to determine how to sensibly invest future federal resources. The HBP does not fully align with GAO's principles for re-examining surface transportation programs in that the program lacks focus, performance measures, and fiscal sustainability. The program's statutory goals are not focused on a clearly identified national interest but rather have expanded from improving deficient bridges to supporting preventive maintenance and many other projects, thus expanding eligibility to include almost any bridge. In addition, the program lacks measures linking funding to performance and does not utilize new tools such as bridge management systems. Fiscal sustainability also remains a challenge given the nearly $30 billion in additional revenues added to the Highway Account since fiscal year 2008.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making any new recommendations. In 2008, GAO recommended that the Secretary of Transportation work with Congress to (1) identify and define national goals for HBP, (2) develop and implement performance measures, (3) identify and evaluate best tools and practices, and (4) review and evaluate HBP funding mechanisms to align funding with performance. DOT generally agreed with these recommendations and has taken some actions to work with Congress to address issues GAO raised regarding the HBP, but much work remains. GAO provided a draft of this testimony to FHWA for review. We incorporated FHWA comments, as appropriate.