Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Public Transportation. Task 59. The Determination of How Federal Section 5316 Funds Were Used Under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy For Users (SAFETEA-LU) and The Transportation Equity Act For The 21st Century (TEA 21)

Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) legislation eliminated the Federal Section 5316 Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) Program as a separate stand-alone program with designated annual funding. Instead, the definitions of eligible activities for both the urban Section 5307 and rural Section 5311 programs were expanded to allow JARC activities to be included for each of these two formula programs. Grantees now have the option of continuing to fund JARC activities under either of these federal programs; however, if they do, this leaves less funding available for other eligible Section 5307 or Section 5311 activities. Grantees also have the option of not having to fund any JARC activities. Prior to MAP-21, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) authorized federal funding for JARC under the federal Section 5316 Program. Under this new stand-alone program, large urbanized areas directly received JARC Program allocations, while JARC funding for both rural, and small urbanized areas, was allocated directly to each State departments of transportation (DOT). States could then decide how to use the available JARC funding in rural, and small urbanized areas. Prior to SAFETEA-LU under Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), the JARC Program was a discretional grant program, and a large portion of the funding available was distributed based on project earmarks. Often, State DOTs received a significant share of these JARC program earmarks, and therefore had the discretion to use these funds in large or small urbanized areas, or in rural areas. As a result, a significant portion of JARC funding in large urbanized areas was administered by State DOTs under TEA-21; while JARC funding in large urbanized areas was typically administered by local grantees in large urbanized areas under SAFETEA-LU. Since the legislation that authorized MAP-21 is only for two years, and expires on September 30, 2014, a decision will need to be made next year regarding how best to provide JARC funding in the future. This program could be authorized as a separate discretionary grant program, as it was under TEA-21; as a separate formula program as it was under SAFETEA-LU, or not authorized as a separate program, but to allow JARC activities to be eligible for funding under the urban Section 5307, and rural Section 5311 programs, as they are under TEA-21. The objective of this research is to provide information on the relative effectiveness of the two alternative ways to authorize federal Section 5316 JARC funds.


  • English


  • Status: Proposed
  • Funding: $75000.00
  • Contract Numbers:

    Project 20-65Task 59

  • Sponsor Organizations:

    Federal Highway Administration

    1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
    Washington, DC  United States  20590

    American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials (AASHTO)

    444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 225
    Washington, DC  United States  20001

    National Cooperative Highway Research Program

    Transportation Research Board
    500 Fifth Street, NW
    Washington, DC  United States  20001
  • Project Managers:

    Chisholm-Smith, Gwen

  • Start Date: 20141117
  • Expected Completion Date: 0
  • Actual Completion Date: 0
  • Source Data: RiP Project 37618

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 01543560
  • Record Type: Research project
  • Source Agency: Transportation Research Board
  • Contract Numbers: Project 20-65Task 59
  • Files: TRB, RiP
  • Created Date: Nov 18 2014 1:03AM