oversight

Transportation-Disadvantaged Populations: Some Coordination Efforts Among Programs Providing Transportation Services, but Obstacles Persist

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 2003-06-30.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

             United States General Accounting Office

GAO          Report to Congressional Requesters




June 2003
             TRANSPORTATION-
             DISADVANTAGED
             POPULATIONS
             Some Coordination
             Efforts Among
             Programs Providing
             Transportation
             Services, but
             Obstacles Persist




GAO-03-697
                                                June 2003


                                                TRANSPORTATION-DISADVANTAGED
                                                POPULATIONS
Highlights of GAO-03-697, a report to
congressional requesters
                                                Some Coordination Efforts Among
                                                Programs Providing Transportation
                                                Services, but Obstacles Persist


Millions of Americans are unable to             Sixty-two federal programs—most of which are administered by the
provide their own transportation—               Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, Education, and
or even use public transportation—              Transportation—fund transportation services for the transportation-
for Medicaid appointments, Head                 disadvantaged. The full amount these programs spend on transportation is
Start classes, job training, or other           unknown because transportation is not always tracked separately from other
services. Such “transportation-
disadvantaged” persons are often
                                                spending. However, available information (i.e., estimated or actual outlays or
disabled, elderly, or low income.               obligations) on 29 of the programs shows that federal agencies spent at least
Various federal programs are                    an estimated $2.4 billion on these services in fiscal year 2001. Additional
authorized to provide                           spending by states and localities is also not fully known but is at least in the
transportation services to them.                hundreds of millions of dollars.
GAO was asked to (1) identify the
federal programs that fund such                 Efforts to improve services and achieve cost savings through coordination of
transportation services and the                 transportation activities (through sharing resources or information or
amount spent on them, (2) assess                consolidating services under a single agency) among federal agencies vary.
the extent of coordination among                The Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility—a body with
the various programs, and (3)                   representation from the Departments of Transportation and Health and
identify any obstacles to
coordination and potential ways to
                                                Human Services—has undertaken some activities to improve coordination.
overcome such obstacles.                        However, other agencies that administer a substantial number of programs
                                                for the transportation-disadvantaged, such as the Departments of Labor and
                                                Education, are not part of the Council. In addition, the Coordinating
                                                Council’s strategic plan is not linked to its action plan and contains few
GAO recommends that the                         measurable performance goals. The strategic and annual performance plans
Departments of Labor and                        of the Departments of Transportation and Health and Human Services
Education join the Coordinating                 contain few references to coordination relating to their subagencies and
Council on Access and Mobility.
                                                programs that fund transportation services for the transportation-
GAO also recommends that the
Departments of Health and Human                 disadvantaged, and the plans of the Departments of Labor and Education do
Services, Labor, Education, and                 not mention coordinating these services.
Transportation (1) strengthen the
Coordinating Council’s strategic                Obstacles impeding coordination include concern among administrators that
plan, (2) include long-term goals               their own participants might be negatively affected, program rules that limit
and measures for coordination in                use by others, and limited guidance and information on coordination. To
their agencies’ strategic and annual            mitigate these obstacles, officials and experts suggested making federal
performance plans, and (3) develop              standards more consistent, creating a clearinghouse or better Web site to
and distribute additional guidance              facilitate interagency communication and provide better guidance on
and information to encourage                    coordination, and providing financial incentives or instituting mandates to
coordination.
                                                coordinate.
The Departments of Health and                   Examples of Vehicles Used to Serve the Transportation-Disadvantaged
Human Services, Labor, Education,
and Transportation generally
concurred with the findings and
recommendations in this report.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-697.

To view the full product, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.
For more information, contact. Katherine
Siggerud at (202) 512-2834.
Contents


Letter                                                                                    1
               Results in Brief                                                           3
               Background                                                                 6
               Sixty-Two Federal Programs Fund Transportation Services to
                  Transportation-Disadvantaged Populations                                8
               Extent of Spending on Services for the Transportation-
                  Disadvantaged Is Not Fully Known but Is in the Billions of
                  Dollars                                                               12
               Coordination Efforts Vary, but Some Successful Efforts Show
                  Promising Results                                                     17
               Officials Cited Numerous Obstacles to Successfully Coordinating
                  Services and Provided Potential Options to Mitigate Them              28
               Conclusions                                                              36
               Recommendations for Executive Action                                     37
               Agency Comments and Our Evaluation                                       38

Appendix I     Scope and Methodology                                                    40



Appendix II    Inventory of Federal Programs Providing
               Transportation Services to the Transportation-
               Disadvantaged                                                            42



Appendix III   Federal and State Coordination Efforts                                   55
               Federal Coordination                                                     55
               State Coordination                                                       60

Appendix IV    Informational Resources on Coordination                                  62
               Web Sites                                                                62
               Reports                                                                  62

Appendix V     Comments from the Department of Health and
               Human Services                                                           63
               GAO Comments                                                             66




               Page i                                GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Appendix VI    Comments from the Department of Education                                67



Appendix VII   GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments                                   69
               GAO Contacts                                                             69
               Staff Acknowledgments                                                    69


Tables
               Table 1: Sixteen Programs Identified by CTAA as Regularly
                        Providing Funding for Transportation                            10
               Table 2: Eleven Programs Spending at Least $4 Million in Fiscal
                        Year 2001                                                       11
               Table 3: Estimated Spending on Transportation Services for the
                        Transportation-Disadvantaged by Eight Federal Agencies
                        in Fiscal Year 2001                                             13
               Table 4: Status of Federal Responses to GAO’s Recommendations
                        to Improve Coordination                                         23
               Table 5: Federal Actions Taken in Response to GAO
                        Recommendations for Improving Coordination                      55
               Table 6: Examples of State Coordination of Services for the
                        Transportation-Disadvantaged                                    60


Figures
               Figure 1: Number of Programs Providing Transportation Services
                        to the Transportation-Disadvantaged, by Agency                    9
               Figure 2: Overlapping Daily Routes of Vehicles Serving the
                        Transportation-Disadvantaged in Sioux Falls, South
                        Dakota                                                          21




               Page ii                               GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Abbreviations

ADA               Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
CTAA              Community Transportation Association of America
CTAP              Community Transportation Assistance Project
DOL               U.S. Department of Labor
DOT               U.S. Department of Transportation
FTA               Federal Transit Administration
GPRA              Government Performance and Results Act of 1993
HHS               U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
HUD               U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
JARC              Job Access and Reverse Commute
MOE               maintenance of effort
P.L.              public law
RTAP              Rural Transit Assistance Program
TANF              Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
                                                      st
TEA-21            Transportation Equity Act for the 21 Century
TCRP              Transit Cooperative Research Program
U.S.C.            U.S. Code
VA                U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
VR                Vocational Rehabilitation
WETAP             Wisconsin Employment Transportation Assistance Program




This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the
United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further
permission from GAO. It may contain copyrighted graphics, images or other materials.
Permission from the copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce
copyrighted materials separately from GAO’s product.




Page iii                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548




                                   June 30, 2003

                                   The Honorable Don Young
                                   Chairman
                                   The Honorable James L. Oberstar
                                   Ranking Democratic Member
                                   Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
                                   House of Representatives

                                   The Honorable Thomas E. Petri
                                   Chairman
                                   The Honorable William O. Lipinski
                                   Ranking Democratic Member
                                   Subcommittee on Highways, Transit, and Pipelines
                                   Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
                                   House of Representatives

                                   The ability to access personal or public transportation is fundamental for
                                   people to connect with employment opportunities, health and medical
                                   services, educational services, and the community at large. However,
                                   certain populations in the United States lack the ability to provide their
                                   own transportation or have difficulty accessing whatever conventional
                                   public transportation may be available. These “transportation-
                                   disadvantaged” persons may have an age-related condition, a disability, or
                                   income constraints. This is potentially a sizeable group. For example,
                                   according to the 2000 U.S. Census, 35.1 million people were over age 65,
                                   44.5 million people were over age 21 and disabled, and 33.9 million people
                                   were living below the poverty line. Many within these populations face
                                   significant problems in accessing transportation.

                                   Many federal programs authorize use of funds to provide transportation
                                   for transportation-disadvantaged people so they can access government
                                   programs. Programs that provide incidental transportation include health
                                   and medical programs, job-training programs, or programs for the aging.
                                   The coordination of these transportation services—through pooling
                                   resources, consolidating trips provided by various agencies under a single
                                   agency, or sharing information between programs—has been found to
                                   improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of service. At the federal level,
                                   the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility—a body consisting of
                                   representatives from the Departments of Health and Human Services and
                                   Transportation—is charged with coordinating transportation services
                                   provided by federal programs and promoting the maximum feasible


                                   Page 1                                   GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
coordination at the state and local levels. In a 1999 report,1 we found that
these coordination efforts needed strengthening. We have also issued
other reports raising concerns about service coordination.2

You asked that we study the extent to which government agencies and
programs are currently providing transportation services to the
transportation-disadvantaged and coordinating the provision of these
transportation services and that we update you on actions taken by the
Coordinating Council since our 1999 report. This report addresses (1) the
federal programs that provide transportation services for transportation-
disadvantaged populations and the types of services they provide; (2)
federal, state, and local government spending for transportation services
through these federal programs;3 (3) the extent of coordination among
state, local, and federal agencies in delivering transportation services for
the transportation-disadvantaged, including actions taken by the
Coordinating Council; and (4) any obstacles that may impede effective
coordination and potential options for overcoming such obstacles.

Our overall approach was to (1) review federal laws and regulations
governing the use of federal funds for services for transportation-
disadvantaged populations; (2) analyze spending data where available; (3)
review federal and other governmental activities and the research
literature related to the coordination of transportation services; and (4)
obtain the views of more than 100 officials from federal, state, and local
government agencies, industry and client advocacy groups, and other
experts involved with or affected by the coordination process on the
obstacles and options for improving coordination. Many of these
interviews were part of case studies that we conducted in five states—
Arizona, Florida, New York, South Dakota, and Wisconsin—to understand
how these various federal programs were implemented and coordinated at
the state and local level. We chose these states to include a cross section


1
 U.S. General Accounting Office, Transportation Coordination: Benefits and Barriers
Exist, and Planning Efforts Progress Slowly, GAO/RCED-00-1 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 22,
1999).
2
 U.S. General Accounting Office, Welfare Reform: Job Access Program Improves Local
Service Coordination, but Evaluation Should Be Completed, GAO-03-204 (Washington,
D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002); Hindrances to Coordinating Transportation of People Participating
in Federally Funded Grant Programs: Volume I, GAO/RCED-77-119 (Washington, D.C.:
Oct. 17, 1977).
3
 For the purposes of this report, spending refers to estimated or actual outlays or
obligations, depending on what information was available from the agency.




Page 2                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                   of characteristics including urban/rural mix, geographic area of the
                   country, and presence or absence of a state council or other coordinating
                   body. Appendix I contains more information about our scope and
                   methodology.


                   We identified 62 federal programs—most of which are administered by the
Results in Brief   Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, Education, and
                   Transportation—that are used to fund transportation services for
                   transportation-disadvantaged populations. Sixteen of these seem
                   particularly relevant in that the Community Transportation Association of
                   America4 identified them as being regularly used to fund transportation
                   services. In addition, based on available information, we identified 11
                   other programs that are notable, in that transportation spending under
                   each one was at least $4 million in fiscal year 2001. While the remaining
                   programs also fund transportation services, they do so minimally, or the
                   extent of transportation services funded is unknown, according to
                   program officials. Most programs purchase transportation services from
                   existing private or public providers. For example, several programs in the
                   Department of Labor typically provide bus tokens, and Medicaid providers
                   often contract with local transportation providers.5 In contrast,
                   Department of Transportation programs and several others such as Head
                   Start in the Department of Health and Human Services typically purchase
                   and operate vehicles or modify them for use by individuals with
                   disabilities. Several of these 62 programs are required to coordinate
                   services they provide with other agencies providing similar services,
                   which can include transportation.

                   Federal, state, and local spending for these transportation services is in
                   the billions of dollars, although the full extent of spending is unknown
                   because transportation spending is not always tracked separately from
                   other program spending. In the 29 programs for which we could obtain
                   actual spending amounts or estimates from program officials, federal


                   4
                    The Community Transportation Association of America is a national, professional
                   membership association that conducts research and provides technical assistance for
                   community transportation providers. See Community Transportation Association of
                   America, Building Mobility Partnerships: Opportunities for Federal Investment
                   (Washington, D.C.: March 2002).
                   5
                    Medicaid is a joint federal-state program to finance health care coverage for certain
                   categories of low-income individuals, including families with children, persons with
                   disabilities, and elderly individuals.




                   Page 3                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
spending on transportation services for transportation-disadvantaged
populations was at least $2.4 billion in fiscal year 2001. Department of
Health and Human Services programs spent about three-quarters of this
amount. State and local agencies also provide funding for many of these
programs, often to fulfill matching requirements, which generally range
from 5 to 50 percent of total program costs for these programs. Estimates
of state and local spending are generally not available because few
agencies track such information at the federal or state level. However,
based on available information, it is evident that state and local
contributions for these services are significant—at least several hundred
million dollars.

Efforts to improve services and achieve cost savings through coordination
of transportation activities among agencies at all levels of government
vary; however, in some areas we visited, close coordination among
providers has shown promising results. Some local agencies have realized
substantial benefits by coordinating their transportation services through
sharing vehicles, consolidating services under a single agency, or sharing
information about available services. For example, a transit agency in
South Dakota consolidated the transportation services previously
provided by both senior and medical centers as well as other federal, state,
and local programs. This consolidation allowed the agency to expand its
service hours and increase the number of trips provided while reducing
the average cost of providing each trip by about 20 percent. We found
instances, however, in which there were overlapping, fragmented, or
confusing services among programs that did not coordinate. For example,
a local official said that the vans delivering clients to the local job center
are owned by many different programs, but because the programs do not
coordinate, only a few people ride in each van. At the federal level,
agencies have taken some limited steps to coordinate their transportation
programs since our 1999 report.6 For example, the Coordinating Council
on Access and Mobility has finalized a strategic plan and issued guidelines
for coordinating transportation services. However, the long-term goals and
objectives in its strategic plan are generally not measurable, and they are
not linked to the activities in the Council’s action plan. Also, the strategic
and annual performance plans of the Departments of Transportation and
Health and Human Services contain few references to coordination of
programs for the transportation-disadvantaged, and the plans of the
Departments of Labor, Education, and the other federal agencies contain


6
GAO/RCED-00-1.




Page 4                                   GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
no such references. In addition, the Coordinating Council only includes
officials from two federal departments (Transportation and Health and
Human Services), representing less than half of the 62 federal programs
that can be used to fund services for the transportation-disadvantaged,
while the Departments of Labor and Education, which administer one-
third of the programs, are not members of the Council. Furthermore, while
the Coordinating Council is working to improve its Web site, the site is not
linked to the Web site of the Department of Health and Human Services,
making it more difficult for human service agencies at all government
levels to be aware of and access the site.

Although decision makers face numerous obstacles in trying to coordinate
transportation services for the transportation-disadvantaged, officials and
experts that we consulted also offered several potential options to mitigate
these obstacles and enhance coordination among federal, state, and local
agencies. We grouped the obstacles into three categories: (1) reluctance to
share vehicles and fund coordination activities due to concerns about
possible adverse effects on clients; (2) different eligibility requirements,
safety standards, and other programmatic requirements that can limit
programs’ ability to share transportation resources; and (3) lack of
leadership and commitment to coordinate, as evidenced by the limited
guidance and information provided by federal and state agencies on the
possible techniques for coordinating services. To mitigate these obstacles,
officials and experts suggested three potential options. One option is to
harmonize standards among federal programs—such as safety standards
related to types of seat belts and driver training requirements—so that
programs can serve additional populations or better share transportation
resources. Another option is to expand interagency forums that would
facilitate communication among agencies involved in coordination efforts
and to share additional technical guidance and information on
coordination among federal and state agencies through a central
clearinghouse or improved Web site. The third option is to provide
financial incentives or mandates that would give priority in federal funding
to those grant applicants that show a strong commitment to coordinate or
require specific coordination efforts among grant recipients as a condition
of receiving federal funding. We did not assess the costs and benefits of
these options; however, some would require extensive statutory or
regulatory changes and could cause agencies to incur significant costs.

Given the multiplicity of federal programs that can fund transportation
services for the transportation-disadvantaged, and the significant amounts
spent on those services, effective coordination efforts are needed to
ensure that transportation services reach the greatest number of


Page 5                                  GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                 recipients. Accordingly, our report contains several recommendations
                 designed to strengthen and enhance coordination activities in the four
                 federal departments that administer most of the programs that fund
                 transportation services—Health and Human Services, Labor, Education,
                 and Transportation. In commenting on the draft of this report, those four
                 departments generally concurred with the findings and recommendations.
                 In addition, we provided the draft report to two other departments that
                 provide services to the transportation-disadvantaged—Housing and Urban
                 Development and Veterans Affairs—and those departments also agreed
                 with the findings. In some cases, these departments also provided
                 technical clarifications, which were incorporated as appropriate to ensure
                 accuracy.


                 Many elderly, disabled, and low-income individuals face significant
Background       challenges in accessing transportation. For example, some of these
                 challenges are as follows:

             •   Sixteen percent of respondents over age 75 reported not having a driver’s
                 license in 2001, and 25 percent of the respondents had not driven at least
                 once in the last month according to an AARP survey.7 Elderly people are
                 also more likely to have difficulty accessing traditional public
                 transportation due to physical ailments.

             •   Thirty percent of respondents with disabilities reported difficulty in
                 accessing transportation, compared to 10 percent of respondents without
                 a disability, according to a 2000 survey by the National Organization on
                 Disabilities.

             •   Low-income households are less likely to own a car than other households
                 due to the prohibitive cost of purchasing, insuring, and maintaining a car,
                 and public transportation may not provide sufficient options for their
                 needs. Over 90 percent of public assistance recipients do not own a car.8




                 7
                  Anita Stowell Ritter, Audrey Straight, Ed Evans, Understanding Senior Transportation:
                 Report and Analysis of a Survey of Consumers Age 50+ (Washington, D.C.: AARP Public
                 Policy Institute, 2002).
                 8
                  U.S. Federal Highway Administration and U.S. Federal Transit Administration, 2002
                 Status of the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance
                 (Washington, D.C.: Department of Transportation, 2003).




                 Page 6                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
The importance of coordinating transportation services for transportation-
disadvantaged populations has been evident since the 1970s. In 1977, we
issued a report on transportation coordination,9 which concluded that the
most significant hindrance to the coordination of transportation services
under these programs was confusion at all levels of government as to how
much coordination federally funded projects could engage in. Since 1986,
responsibility for coordinating transportation programs at the federal level
has rested in the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility, which was
created under a memorandum of understanding between the Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of
Transportation (DOT). This body is composed of representatives from
program offices within these departments, and employees of the two
departments meet its staffing needs, on a part-time basis.

More recent reviews have continued to identify a need for stronger efforts
in this area. In a 1999 report on transportation coordination,10 we found
that coordination efforts of the Coordinating Council, DOT, and HHS were
ongoing but still needed strengthening. This report also noted that the
Congress had endorsed increased coordination as evidenced by several
provisions in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-
21),11 and significant financial benefits had been realized through
coordination. In addition, reports by advocacy groups and transportation
researchers have raised concerns over continuing duplication of effort
among federal programs and certain sub-populations still not being served
effectively.12




9
GAO/RCED-77-119.
10
    GAO/RCED-00-1.
11
    P.L. 105-178.
12
  For example, a report prepared for AARP found that transportation resources for the
elderly, disabled, and other groups were often not coordinated, leading to duplication of
services. The services were also found to vary in quality and to fail to address the needs of
individuals who did not meet specific agency or program eligibility requirements. See Jon
E. Burkhardt, Coordinated Transportation Systems (Washington, D.C.: AARP, September
2000).




Page 7                                            GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                    We identified 62 federal programs that fund transportation services to
Sixty-Two Federal   populations that are transportation-disadvantaged.13 As shown in figure 1,
Programs Fund       the bulk of these programs are administered by four federal agencies—23
                    programs in HHS, 15 programs in the Department of Labor (DOL), 8
Transportation      programs in the Department of Education, and 6 programs in DOT.14 The
Services to         remaining 10 programs are administered by the Departments of Housing
                    and Urban Development (HUD), Veterans Affairs (VA), Agriculture, and
Transportation-     the Interior. A full listing of programs, their authorizing legislation, typical
Disadvantaged       uses, types of trips provided, target populations, and spending information
Populations         is found in appendix II.




                    13
                      In addition to these 62 programs, it is likely that there other federal programs that could
                    be used to fund transportation improvements or other transportation services. Our scope
                    included programs that provide nonemergency, nonmilitary, surface transportation
                    services, targeted to transportation-disadvantaged populations. We excluded most
                    programs that were strictly for research or demonstration activities or provided strictly
                    cash assistance with no restrictions on use, as well as some economic development
                    programs that benefit the general public and are not targeted to transportation-
                    disadvantaged populations. Efforts by other researchers to inventory all federal programs
                    that could conceivably provide transportation yielded additional programs not found in our
                    inventory due to differing selection criteria. See Building Mobility Partnerships:
                    Opportunities for Federal Investment.
                    14
                      Two DOT programs that are included here, the Urbanized Area and Nonurbanized Area
                    Formula Programs, are used to support mass transit intended for the general public, many
                    of whom could conceivably provide their own transportation. We include them because the
                    Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 126) requires that transit
                    operators provide accessible paratransit service that is comparable to their regular service
                    for disabled individuals who are unable to provide their own transportation or access the
                    regular transit system, and TEA-21 allows a portion of these transit formula grants to be
                    used to offset paratransit operating costs.




                    Page 8                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Figure 1: Number of Programs Providing Transportation Services to the
Transportation-Disadvantaged, by Agency




Many of the 62 programs are significantly involved in providing
transportation services to their recipients. These include 16 programs
identified by the Community Transportation Association of America
(CTAA)15 as being routinely used to provide transportation and an
additional 11 programs that we identified as spending at least $4 million
for transportation services to transportation-disadvantaged populations in
fiscal year 2001 on the basis of funding data or estimates that were
available. The remaining programs also fund transportation services, but
do so minimally, or the extent of transportation services funded is
unknown, according to program officials. Table 1 shows the 16 programs
identified by CTAA and how they provide transportation. These 16
programs are administered by DOT, HHS, Education, and DOL. As the
table shows, transportation is not the primary purpose of most of these
programs. For example, Medicaid provides payments for medical services,
and the Vocational Rehabilitation Grants Program provides training and
employment services to individuals with disabilities.




15
 Building Mobility Partnerships: Opportunities for Federal Investment.




Page 9                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Table 1: Sixteen Programs Identified by CTAA as Regularly Providing Funding for Transportation

Agency               Program                     Description
                                                 Assists states in operating programs that provide vocational rehabilitation services
Department of        Vocational
                                                 for individuals with disabilities. Services include counseling, training, job placement,
Education            Rehabilitation Grants
                                                 and other supportive services, including transportation.
Department of        Grants for Supportive       Assists states in developing a community-based system of services for older
Health and Human     Services and Senior         individuals. Services provided include nutrition services, caregiver support services,
Services             Centers                     senior centers, and transportation services.
                     Program for American
                                                 Assists tribal organizations in the delivery of supportive services to older Native
                     Indian, Alaskan Native,
                                                 Americans. Services provided include nutrition services, caregiver support services,
                     and Native Hawaiian
                                                 senior centers, and transportation services.
                     Elders
                     Head Start                  Assists local grantees in providing a program of comprehensive health, educational,
                                                 and other services to promote school readiness for low-income children.
                                                 Transportation to and from program services is generally provided.
                     Medicaid                    Assists states in payments for medical assistance to populations that meet
                                                 categorical eligibility (such as families with children or persons who are elderly or
                                                 disabled) as well as income and resource requirements. States are required to
                                                 assure transportation to medical services.
                     Temporary Assistance        Provides grants to states or tribes to assist needy families with children. Grantees
                     for Needy Families          have the flexibility to use funds in any manner that meets the purposes of the
                                                 program, which can include transportation to services.
Department of        Senior Community            Assists states and other grantees in providing work opportunities in community
Labor                Service Employment          service activities for low-income individuals 55 years of age and older. Transportation
                     Program                     to training and job placements can be provided.
                     Workforce Investment        Assists states in providing workforce investment activities. “Intensive” services
                     Act Adult Services          provided to low-income participants include occupational and basic skills training,
                     Program                     and transportation can be provided to access such services.
                     Workforce Investment        Assists states in providing workforce investment activities. “Intensive” services
                     Act Dislocated Worker       provided to low-income participants include occupational and basic skills training,
                     Program                     and transportation can be provided to access such services.
                     Workforce Investment        Assists states in providing workforce investment activities that will help low-income
                     Act Youth Activities        youth acquire the skills, training, and support needed to achieve employment
                                                 success. Transportation can be provided to access services.
Department of        Capital Investment          Assists states in financing facilities for use in mass public transportation service.
Transportation       Grants                      Projects can include those that are designed to meet the special needs of elderly or
                                                 disabled individuals.
                     Urbanized Area              Assists urbanized areas in financing capital projects for use in mass transportation
                     Formula Program             service. Ten percent of funds may be used to pay for ADA paratransit operating
                                                        a
                                                 costs.
                     Nonurbanized Area           Assists nonurbanized areas with capital and operating expenses needed to provide
                     Formula Program             public transportation service. Ten percent of funds may be used to pay for ADA
                                                 paratransit operating costs.
                     Job Access and              Provides grants to develop transportation services to connect low-income persons to
                     Reverse Commute             employment and support services. Funds can be used for capital and operating costs
                                                 associated with new or expanded service.
                     Capital and Training        Assists private operators of over-the-road buses with financing capital and training
                     Assistance for Over-        costs associated with making buses accessible to individuals with disabilities.
                     the-Road Bus
                     Accessibility




                                             Page 10                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
 Agency                         Program                            Description
                                Capital Assistance                 Provides financial assistance to nonprofit organizations in meeting the transportation
                                Program for Elderly                needs of elderly persons and persons with disabilities where public transportation
                                Persons and Persons                services are unavailable, insufficient, or inappropriate. Funds may be used for
                                with Disabilities                  eligible capital expenses, such as purchasing vehicles, or to contract for service.
Sources: CTAA and Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.
                                                            a
                                                             The ADA required that all fixed route transportation services and facilities be accessible to individuals
                                                            with disabilities, including wheelchair users. While the ADA gave priority to providing such
                                                            transportation in the same vehicles used by the general riding public, it also required complimentary
                                                            paratransit systems as a “safety net” for individuals whose disabilities prevent them from using
                                                            accessible fixed-route services.


                                                            Table 2 shows the 11 programs we identified as spending at least $4
                                                            million on transportation for the transportation-disadvantaged in fiscal
                                                            year 2001.

                                                            Table 2: Eleven Programs Spending at Least $4 Million in Fiscal Year 2001

                                                                Agency                                 Program
                                                                Department of Agriculture              Food Stamp Employment and Training Program
                                                                Department of Education                21st-Century Community Learning Centers
                                                                Department of Labor                    Job Corps
                                                                Department of Health and               Community Health Centers
                                                                Human Services                         HIV Care Grants
                                                                                                       Social Services Block Grants
                                                                                                       State Children’s Health Insurance Program
                                                                Department of Housing and              Community Development Block Grant
                                                                Urban Development                      Supportive Housing Program
                                                                Department of Veterans Affairs         Automobiles and Adaptive Equipment for Certain
                                                                                                       Disabled Veterans
                                                                                                       Veterans Medical Care
                                                            Source: GAO.



                                                            Under most of the federal programs providing transportation services,
                                                            funding recipients typically purchase the services from existing sources,
                                                            according to program officials. This includes contracting for services with
                                                            private transportation providers or providing bus tokens, transit passes,
                                                            taxi vouchers, mileage reimbursement to volunteers or program
                                                            participants, or some combination of these methods. For example,
                                                            recipients of funds from DOL’s Workforce Investment Act Adult Services
                                                            Program typically provide bus tokens or mileage reimbursement for
                                                            participants to access training, while recipients of HHS’s Grants for
                                                            Supportive Services and Senior Centers most often contract with local
                                                            transportation providers to provide client transportation. The funding
                                                            recipients of several programs, however, typically purchase and operate



                                                            Page 11                                                 GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                          vehicles, or modify existing vehicles for use by individuals with
                          disabilities. These programs include Head Start and the Program for
                          American Indian, Alaskan Native, and Hawaiian Elders in HHS; the
                          Vocational Rehabilitation Grants Program in the Department of Education;
                          and the six programs within DOT.

                          Several of these programs have requirements for grantees to coordinate
                          their services with other agencies providing similar services, which would
                          include transportation, among other services. For example, Head Start
                          grantees are required to make every reasonable effort to coordinate
                          transportation services they provide with other human service
                          transportation in their communities. Similarly, DOT’s Capital Assistance
                          Program for Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities, Job Access and
                          Reverse Commute, and Nonurbanized Area Formula Program have
                          requirements for grantees to coordinate their transportation services. In
                          addition, some programs have provisions designed to avoid duplication of
                          effort and encourage the use of existing community resources. For
                          example, Workforce Investment Act programs may use funds to support
                          those who are participating in the program only if those individuals are
                          unable to obtain services through other programs, according to program
                          officials. Also, the Veterans’ Workforce Investment Program requires
                          grantees to provide information on the linkages this program will have
                          with other providers of services to benefit veterans.


                          Available information shows that federal programs spent an estimated $2.4
Extent of Spending on     billion on transportation services for transportation-disadvantaged
Services for the          populations in fiscal year 2001, and additional state and local spending for
                          these populations was several hundred million dollars more. Complete
Transportation-           spending information is not available because many federal funding
Disadvantaged Is Not      recipients are not required to distinguish transportation from other
                          spending when reporting spending information to federal agencies.
Fully Known but Is in
the Billions of Dollars




                          Page 12                                 GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Spending by 29 Federal                                         Information on federal spending for transportation is available for 29 of
Programs Is Estimated at                                       the 62 programs we identified.16 These programs spent an estimated $2.4
$2.4 billion in Fiscal Year                                    billion on transportation services in fiscal year 2001. (Appendix II lists
                                                               available spending data for each federal program.) Based on available
2001                                                           information, HHS programs as a whole spent the most on transportation
                                                               for transportation-disadvantaged populations in 2001—an estimated $1.8
                                                               billion. Table 3 shows estimated transportation spending by the eight
                                                               federal agencies that fund services for the transportation-disadvantaged.

Table 3: Estimated Spending on Transportation Services for the Transportation-Disadvantaged by Eight Federal Agencies in
Fiscal Year 2001

                                                               Amount spent on
                                                              transportation for
                                                                 transportation-                                                             Total number of
                                                                 disadvantaged                Percent of total      Number of programs programs that provide
 Agency                                                             (in millions)                   estimate        included in estimate      transportation
 Department of Health and
 Human Services                                                             $1,771.0                       72.4%                    10                      23
 Department of Transportation                                                 $317.3                       13.0%                     6                       6
 Department of Veterans Affairs                                               $160.8                        6.6%                     3                       3
 Department of Education                                                      $135.3                        5.5%                     2                       8
 Department of Labor                                                           $26.4                        1.1%                     3                      15
 Department of Housing and
 Urban Development                                                           $21.7                           0.9%                    4                       4
 Department of Agriculture                                                   $13.0                           0.5%                    1                       1
 Department of the Interior                                           Not available                          0.0%                    0                       2
 Total (for 8 agencies)                                                   $2,445.5                         100.0%                   29                      62
Sources: GAO summary of HHS, DOT, VA, Education, DOL, Agriculture, HUD, and Interior data and estimates.




                                                               More than three-quarters of our estimate is based on spending for
                                                               transportation in five programs. Of the five, Medicaid and Head Start, both
                                                               in HHS, spent the most on transportation in fiscal year 2001—an estimated
                                                               $976.2 million and $514.5 million, respectively. The three other programs,
                                                               all of which spent more than $100 million on services for the
                                                               transportation-disadvantaged in fiscal year 2001, were DOT’s Capital
                                                               Assistance Program for Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities,




                                                               16
                                                                Of these 29 programs, 17 provided actual spending data for fiscal year 2001. Program
                                                               officials for the remaining 12 programs provided an estimate of transportation spending for
                                                               2001.




                                                               Page 13                                                   GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                             HHS’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and VA’s
                             Veterans Medical Care Benefits.

                             The amount spent on transportation services by the remaining 33 federal
                             programs is unknown, mainly because the majority of programs do not
                             require recipients of federal funds to report transportation spending
                             information to the federal agency.17


State and Local              Total state and local spending for transportation services, which
Transportation Spending Is   supplements federal spending for such programs, is likely significant—at
Unknown, but Is Likely       least in the hundreds of millions of dollars—although the total is unknown
                             because most programs do not require grantees to report these data.
Significant                  Matching requirements, which represent the nonfederal contributions to
                             the program’s costs that come from state, local, or private funds, provide
                             some information on state and local spending on transportation for the
                             transportation-disadvantaged. About half of the 62 programs have
                             matching requirements that generally require states and localities to
                             contribute between 5 and 50 percent of total costs.18 Additionally, limited
                             information from officials in the five states we visited indicates that total



                             17
                               Total program obligations for these 33 programs were about $14.8 billion in fiscal year
                             2001. While information was not available on the portion of the $14.8 billion devoted to
                             providing transportation services, we were able to analyze data on other human services
                             programs which indicate that, on average, about 3 percent of total spending on those
                             programs was devoted to transportation. We do not know whether this 3 percent is an
                             appropriate estimate of transportation spending for these 33 programs because grantees
                             are not required to report transportation spending information to the federal agency.
                             Furthermore, several officials who administer programs that had no spending data told us
                             that transportation services probably represented less than 1 percent of their total program
                             spending.
                             18
                               It is difficult to determine the amount of nonfederal contributions to transportation
                             services on the basis of matching requirements because grantees are generally required to
                             match total program spending rather than spending for a particular service, such as
                             transportation. To illustrate, Head Start grantees are required to contribute 20 percent of
                             total program costs, not necessarily 20 percent of transportation costs. Transportation
                             under the program could be entirely funded from federal dollars while the local share is
                             used to fund teachers or other program costs. The issue is further complicated because
                             some of these programs have maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements (which require
                             states and localities to maintain their contributions to a program at some pre-determined
                             level) rather than matching requirements. Under the TANF program, for example, the
                             state’s MOE requirement is determined through an index against the amount the state spent
                             for fiscal year 1994 under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. MOE
                             funds will, therefore, constitute a different percentage of total program spending for each
                             state in each year.




                             Page 14                                          GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
    state and local spending on transportation runs into the hundreds of
    millions of dollars. For example:

•   Nonfederal contributions for Medicaid nonemergency transportation
    ranged from 32 to 50 percent of the total spending on this service in the
    five states that we visited.19 In New York, 50 percent, or an estimated
    $139.4 million, of the state’s total spending on Medicaid funded
    transportation in 2001 was from nonfederal sources. In Florida and
    Wisconsin approximately 40 percent of the total amount spent on
    nonemergency medical transportation in the state was from nonfederal
    sources; state contributions in those states were $28.6 million and $13.4
    million, respectively, in 2001. In Arizona and South Dakota, approximately
    one-third of the total amount spent on Medicaid transportation was from
    nonfederal sources in those states in 2001, approximately $7.0 million and
    $490,000, respectively.

•   In Wisconsin nearly 38 percent, or $922,000, of the funding to provide
    transportation services through DOT’s Capital Assistance Program for
    Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities in 2001 was from nonfederal
    sources. The program requires grantees to provide 20 percent of total
    program funding.

•   In New York, about 30 percent of the spending on transportation under the
    Department of Education’s Vocational Rehabilitation Program in 2002, or
    $2.6 million, was from nonfederal sources.20 Similarly, about 27 percent or
    $673,000 of Florida’s funding was from nonfederal sources in 2001. The
    program requires states to contribute 21.3 percent of total costs.

    Although some states and localities currently spend a significant amount
    for transportation through federal programs, many now face budget
    deficits that could diminish their future contribution to these programs. In
    a 2003 survey by the National Conference of State Legislatures,21 36 states



    19
      The amount that states are required to contribute depends on how states claim
    transportation under Medicaid. If states claim Medicaid as an optional medical expense,
    the state or local portion ranges from 17 to 50 percent of total costs, based on a measure
    known as the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage. If states claim transportation as an
    administrative expense, the state or local portion is 50 percent of total costs.
    20
     Data for state fiscal year 2001 were not available. Program officials indicate that there
    should not be significant differences in 2001 and 2002 spending information.
    21
     National Conference of State Legislatures, State Budget Update: February 2003
    (Washington, D.C.: February 2003).




    Page 15                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
    reported budget deficits midway through their fiscal year. Fifteen of these
    states reported deficits in excess of 5 percent of the state budget, and four
    states are facing deficits greater than 10 percent of the state budget.
    Because 49 states have balanced budget requirements, such large deficits
    could lead to a decrease in the amount of funds available to states for
    programmatic spending, including transportation programs. For example,
    according to the National Conference of State Legislatures report, 29
    states have imposed across-the-board cuts in response to budget deficits.

    State budget deficits have affected state transportation spending
    differently in the five states that we visited. For example:

•   Two of the states have cut their state programs that local grantees used to
    fund services for the transportation-disadvantaged, according to
    transportation officials in those states. In one state, the state legislature
    eliminated the state’s transportation assistance program to help deal with
    the state’s budget deficit; as a result, the state official and the director of a
    senior center in the state said that some of the projects funded through the
    program will likely be discontinued because grantees cannot find
    replacement funds. In the other state, the state legislature cut a state fund
    that grantees used to supplement federal transportation funding.
    According to an official, the loss of this fund, combined with the
    increasing costs of fuel and insurance, may lead providers to cut service to
    transportation-disadvantaged populations by as much as 40 percent.

•   In another state, the Governor’s plan for closing the state’s budget gap
    includes reducing spending on Medicaid nonemergency medical
    transportation by $5 million, or 7.6 percent; however, the state’s fund
    dedicated to providing other services for the transportation-disadvantaged
    was not recommended for cuts.

•   Transportation officials in two states told us that they had not yet
    experienced cuts in state funding for services for the transportation-
    disadvantaged. In one of the states, local grantees rely on a state
    transportation fund and a large set-aside of TANF funds to provide
    services to transportation-disadvantaged populations. Without these two
    funds, local grantees would have difficulty financing services for the
    transportation-disadvantaged, according to an official. The other state is
    not currently anticipating cuts in state funding for services for
    transportation-disadvantaged populations, however, according to an
    official, the full impact of the fiscal situation in that state will not be
    known until local governments develop program budgets for 2004 because
    the local governments—which are also facing budget constraints—play a
    key role in determining what services will be provided.


    Page 16                                    GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                            While some states are not currently experiencing reductions in their
                            transportation programs, many states are anticipating that budget deficits
                            will continue into 2004. According to the National Conference of State
                            Legislatures report, 36 states are anticipating budget gaps for 2004; nearly
                            all of these states anticipate gaps greater than 5 percent of their state
                            budget and half of these states expect gaps greater than 10 percent.22


                            Efforts to improve services and achieve cost savings through coordination
Coordination Efforts        of transportation activities among agencies at all levels of government
Vary, but Some              vary. At the state and local levels, the extent and the type of coordination
                            activities differ, ranging from one state body providing guidance and
Successful Efforts          overseeing coordination efforts for most of its programs to two local
Show Promising              agencies sharing vehicles. In some areas within the five states we visited,
                            coordination among providers has resulted in significant benefits, such as
Results                     improved customer service and lower unit costs. However, we also found
                            some examples of overlapping, fragmented, or confusing services resulting
                            from a lack of coordination. At the federal level, DOT, HHS, and—to some
                            extent—DOL have undertaken some activities aimed at improving
                            coordination among their programs. DOT and HHS implement many of
                            their activities through the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility.
                            However, DOT and HHS make only a few mentions of coordinating
                            services for the transportation-disadvantaged in their strategic and annual
                            performance plans, and other agencies do not mention such activities at
                            all. Also, several federal agencies that provide services to the
                            transportation-disadvantaged are not involved in coordination efforts at
                            the national level.


Extent of State and Local   While agencies within each state we visited were involved in some form of
Transportation              coordination, the extent of coordination of transportation services varies
Coordination Varies         widely. For example, Florida has a state organization that oversees the
                            coordination of most of the transportation services for the transportation-
                            disadvantaged, while some other states we visited had no statewide
                            coordination body. Even in states without such a coordinating body,
                            however, some state and local agencies are engaged in coordination
                            efforts. This variation also occurred in the nation as a whole, according to
                            data from a preliminary report by the National Academy of Sciences’
                            Transportation Research Board, which found that roughly half of U.S.


                            22
                             Eleven states and the District of Columbia did not report 2004 budget deficit information.




                            Page 17                                         GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
states have a state transportation coordinating body. 23 (See appendix III
for information on the type of coordination in the five states we visited
and the state agencies involved.)

Within each state, local efforts also varied. Examples of coordination
activities include the following:

Coordinated planning: In this type of coordination, some combination of
human service and transportation agencies and providers work together to
plan transportation services for their clients. For example, in northwestern
Wisconsin, at the initiative of staff from a center for independent living,
the Area Consortium on Transportation was formed in 2001 to improve the
planning and provision of transportation for the disabled and others who
are transit-dependent. The council—which consists of consumers, transit
providers, county and city officials, disability organizations, and aging
groups—is instituting several pilot programs to test various methods of
coordination.

Brokerage: 24 In this type of coordination, one agency or provider serves as
the central point of contact for providing ride and eligibility information or
actually arranging transportation services for clients of multiple programs.
For example, officials in several New York counties wanted to maximize
residents’ mobility by coordinating transportation services offered by
various federal and state programs, but lacked the expertise or start-up
costs to do so. With a grant from the state Departments of Transportation
and Health, the counties instituted a coordination demonstration project
whereby one agency arranges an average of 2,500 daily trips for clients
from a number of populations—such as the disabled, senior citizens,
former welfare recipients, and others—served by different federal and
state programs.




23
 Westat, Toolkit for Rural Community Coordinated Transportation Services, Transit
Cooperative Research Project of the Transportation Research Board, Project B-24, Interim
Report (Rockville, MD: March 2002).
24
  The Community Transportation Association of America defines brokerage as a method of
providing transportation where riders are matched with appropriate transportation
providers through a central trip-request and administration facility. The transportation
broker may centralize vehicle dispatch, record keeping, vehicle maintenance, and other
functions under contractual arrangements with agencies, municipalities, and other
organizations. Actual trips are provided by a number of different vendors.




Page 18                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                               Shared use of vehicles among multiple programs: In this type of
                               coordination, one agency may provide transportation for clients of
                               multiple programs, or each program may own its own vehicles but allow
                               them to be used by other programs. For example, in Arizona, vans from
                               one county’s vocational rehabilitation center travel to a neighboring
                               county to pick up program clients. While there, they also transport clients
                               of Jobs Administration programs. The two programs split the cost of
                               transportation equally.

                               Appendix IV contains a list of some informational resources available for
                               agencies interested in coordinating.


Coordination Has Led to        In some areas we visited, coordination among providers—through sharing
Improvements, While Lack       vehicles, consolidating services under a single agency, or sharing
of Coordination Can Result     information about available services—has resulted in significant benefits,
                               such as improved customer service and lower unit costs. State and local
in Overlap                     agencies providing transportation under the 62 federal programs often
                               serve similar client groups, provide similar services, and operate in similar
                               geographic areas, so there can be duplication of effort and inefficiency in
                               providing transportation when those agencies do not coordinate. In our
                               site visits, we found several examples of overlapping, fragmented, or
                               confusing services in places where agencies were not coordinating.

Benefits of Coordination       Through coordination, some local agencies have realized both improved
                               levels of service and financial benefits, such as reduced costs of providing
                               each trip, as follows:

                               Improved customer service:

                           •   A coordinated system in central Florida provides transportation for
                               Medicaid, vocational rehabilitation, and other programs. According to
                               local officials, vans used to show up late, if at all, and clients had difficulty
                               finding out the status of their ride. Since consolidating services under a
                               single provider and bringing scheduling and dispatch services in-house,
                               officials report service improvement.

                           •   Through collaboration, information-sharing, and cost-sharing among
                               county agencies, the Clinton County transit system in New York serves
                               both Medicaid and elderly populations, making it easier for those
                               populations to access medical and community services because they only
                               have to be familiar with one system.




                               Page 19                                    GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                       •   A federal regional official said that coordination could remove the stigma
                           of specialized transportation because all recipients use the same service
                           and are treated equally.

                           Financial benefits:

                       •   Three New York counties joined in a transportation brokering service that
                           saved an estimated $92,000 in 2001 by identifying a lower-cost alternative
                           means of transportation, that is, moving groups of clients in buses rather
                           than transporting individual clients in taxis. This brokerage service
                           provides transportation to Medicaid patients, the disabled, veterans, and
                           other client groups.

                       •   In Aberdeen, South Dakota, the local transit agency consolidated the
                           transportation services previously provided by both senior and medical
                           centers as well as other federal, state, and local programs. This
                           consolidation allowed the agency to increase the number of trips provided
                           while reducing the average cost of providing each trip by about 20
                           percent—from about $5 to $4. The agency has also improved its services
                           by coordinating with local taxi companies to provide night and weekend
                           trips.

Effects of a Lack of       Although the various programs we reviewed target specific populations,
Coordination               some populations are eligible to receive transportation services from
                           multiple programs, resulting in duplication and inefficiency in some cases.
                           In our visits with state and local transportation and human service
                           agencies and providers, officials we interviewed identified several
                           examples of overlapping services in areas or programs that were not
                           coordinating. A for-profit transportation provider in one state told us that
                           he often has two vehicles overlap on the same route at the same time, one
                           for medical trips and one for paratransit,25 because it is too difficult to mix
                           clients due to complicated fee structures and paperwork requirements
                           imposed by the state for the two programs. An official from a workforce
                           development program in another state told us that many programs in his
                           county use their own vans to deliver clients to the job center, but because
                           the programs do not coordinate, only a few people ride in each van. In
                           another locality that state and local officials said has had difficulty
                           coordinating, several human service providers hired a consultant to study


                           25
                             Paratransit most often refers to wheelchair-accessible, demand-response van service,
                           according to the Community Transportation Association of America, and is more flexible
                           than fixed route transit but more structured than the use of a private automobile.




                           Page 20                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
the extent to which various agencies provide similar transportation
services within a geographic region. This research showed substantial
overlap in local services for the transportation-disadvantaged, as shown in
figure 2. The consultant identified ways in which the number of routes
could be substantially reduced through better coordination, which are
being considered by the agencies involved.

Figure 2: Overlapping Daily Routes of Vehicles Serving the Transportation-
Disadvantaged in Sioux Falls, South Dakota




Note: This picture shows the daily routes of vehicles operated by seven different agencies in the
same region of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Overlap occurs when routes have the same or nearby
starting and ending points and are transporting similar clients at similar times. This graphic illustrates
that many of these agencies have similar starting and ending points. Among the agencies shown in
this graphic are two vocational rehabilitation agencies (serving the same general population) as well
as agencies that serve low-income clients or clients with disabilities. While the graphic cannot show
the time element, many of these routes represent trips occurring within 30 minutes of each other in
the morning and afternoon.




Page 21                                                  GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                              State and local officials also provided examples of fragmented services
                              and confusion in localities without coordinated programs. One official in
                              an uncoordinated area said that a lack of coordination results in
                              fragmented services, placing a burden on people who receive
                              transportation through many different programs, depending on trip
                              purpose, because they must be familiar with multiple systems, rules, and
                              requirements. Fragmentation also occurs when adjoining counties do not
                              coordinate their public transportation routes, leaving riders stranded due
                              to unconnected transit systems. In one state, local officials told us that
                              paratransit services do not extend beyond county lines, so people have to
                              schedule two separate trips to get from their homes in one county to
                              medical services in an adjoining county. When the first paratransit ride is
                              behind schedule, a passenger sometimes has to wait for hours for the
                              connecting ride. A provider in another state has contracts to provide
                              transportation services for clients in multiple human service programs.
                              Because of a lack of coordination among those programs, the
                              transportation provider said that his company has to maintain two
                              separate dispatching and reservation systems for its vehicles to comply
                              with differing reporting and eligibility requirements. Vehicles can only
                              operate under one dispatching system at a time, so the drivers cannot
                              provide rides to more than one type of client at a time. The provider also
                              said that clients who call for rides are confused by the sheer number of
                              programs, and the agents who make their reservations do not know for
                              which programs the clients are eligible.


Federal Progress toward       Although the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility and various
Improved Coordination         federal agencies have taken a number of steps to improve coordination,
Varies                        these efforts have had mixed results.

Some Prior Recommendations    As shown in table 4, the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility—a
to the Coordinating Council   body consisting of representatives from DOT and HHS—has responded to
Have Been Implemented         three of the recommendations we made in our 1999 report26 by adopting a
                              strategic plan, developing an action plan, and helping to ensure that
                              planned coordination efforts reinforce one another by issuing guidelines
                              for coordinating transportation services. Goals and objectives in the
                              strategic plan include such things as promoting interdepartmental
                              collaboration at the federal level through the development of a joint
                              agenda for transportation research that is of common use to multiple


                              26
                               GAO/RCED-00-1.




                              Page 22                                 GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
federal departments. According to the most recent action plan, the Council
has completed some activities, such as producing a series of “how to”
publications on using intelligent transportation systems to assist in the
coordination of HHS programs with local transit agencies.

Table 4: Status of Federal Responses to GAO’s Recommendations to Improve
Coordination

 Recommendations from 1999 GAO report                      Completed     Under way
 The DOT/ HHS Coordinating Council on Access and                   X
 Mobility should adopt a prioritized strategic plan.
 The Coordinating Council should develop an action plan              X
 with specific responsibilities.
 The Coordinating Council should issue an annual report                           X
 on its major initiatives and accomplishments to the
 Secretaries of DOT and HHS.
 DOT and HHS should ensure that planned coordination                 X
 efforts reinforce one another.
 DOT and HHS should direct their regional working                                 X
 groups to assess obstacles to transportation
 coordination.
 The Coordinating Council should strengthen its Web site                          X
 and make information available on obstacles to
 coordination and strategies to overcome them.
Source: GAO.



The Council’s responses to the other three recommendations are still
ongoing. For example, Council representatives told us that they plan to
issue their first annual report on coordination achievements in June 2003,
although this report was originally due to be issued in October 2000,
according to the Council’s strategic plan. With regard to the
recommendation on regional working groups, the 10 DOT and HHS
regional offices have been convening workshops with state transportation
officials during 2003 to discuss obstacles to coordination and other issues.

Finally, the Council’s efforts to strengthen its Web site have had mixed
results. One of the tasks listed in the Council’s strategic plan is to develop
and maintain a Web site that would, among other things, enhance the
exchange of coordination ideas, issues, and concerns. The Council has
developed a Web site27—operated by DOT in conjunction with CTAA—that
is reachable through a link on the Federal Transit Administration’s section
of DOT’s Web site. However, there is no similar link from HHS’s Web site


27
 www.fta.dot.gov/CCAM/www.index.html.




Page 23                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                (or the Web sites of other federal agencies that fund transportation
                                services for the transportation-disadvantaged), possibly making it more
                                difficult for human service and other agencies to be aware of and access
                                the site. In addition, the site does not yet contain specific information on
                                obstacles to coordination or strategies for overcoming them, which we
                                recommended in 1999, though it does contain links to some reports on the
                                subject. There is also a page from which viewers can E-mail the Council
                                with questions or suggestions. The Council is working with CTAA to
                                further strengthen the site.

DOT and HHS Have Sponsored      Through the Council, DOT and HHS have sponsored a number of other
Other Coordination Activities   efforts to enhance coordination. For example, as part of an item in the
                                Council’s action plan, DOT and HHS helped initiate a consortium of
                                national professional organizations and interest groups28 to conduct
                                research and provide educational activities related to coordinating
                                services for the transportation-disadvantaged. Among other tasks, the
                                consortium has been asked to pursue several items from the Council’s
                                action plan, such as identifying promising practices and obstacles in
                                transportation coordination and developing strategies for addressing the
                                obstacles. Officials from the Council said that working with the
                                consortium provides a depth of knowledge and experience because
                                consortium members represent local as well as national interests so that
                                issues are pursued “from both ends.”

                                As part of the upcoming regional workshops sponsored by the DOT and
                                HHS regional offices, participants will discuss expanded opportunities for
                                achieving more coordinated delivery of transportation services in medical,
                                aging, and other assistance programs, and technical assistance resources
                                will be shared with participants. Intended audiences include state
                                transportation coordinating councils; state agencies that administer
                                medical, aging, and other assistance programs; and agencies serving
                                individuals with disabilities. According to DOT and HHS, participants will
                                be asked to develop state transportation coordination action plans for
                                their home state, and resources will be made available to assist states in


                                28
                                 To date, the consortium consists of the AARP, Amalgamated Transit Union, American
                                Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, American Public Transportation
                                Association, American Public Human Services Association, American Public Works
                                Association, American Red Cross, Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations,
                                Children’s Health Fund, Community Transportation Association of America, Easter Seals
                                Project Action, National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, National Conference of
                                State Legislatures, National Governor’s Association, and the Taxicab, Limousine, and
                                Paratransit Association.




                                Page 24                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                               implementing their plans following the workshop. (See appendix III for
                               more information on federal coordination activities.)

Coordination Remains Largely   Because it is not a federal executive branch agency, the Coordinating
Unaddressed in Strategic       Council is not subject to the requirements of the Government Performance
Planning Efforts               and Results Act (GPRA) of 199329 and, therefore, does not have to follow
                               the act’s guidance for producing strategic plans, annual performance
                               plans, and annual reports. However, there are several best practices in
                               strategic planning that could be useful guides for improving the Council’s
                               strategic plan when it is updated at the end of 2003 and the action plan
                               when it is next updated. For example, the current strategic plan does not
                               contain an overall mission statement for the Council or performance
                               measures that clearly relate to its long-term goals and objectives, both of
                               which are considered best practices in strategic planning.30 In addition,
                               there are no explicit links between the stated goals and objectives in the
                               strategic plan and the activities in the action plan. For example, the
                               current action plan includes seven tasks related to the use of information
                               technology systems, but those tasks are not clearly linked to any of the
                               Council’s long-term goals or objectives.

                               Because the Council has no funding or full-time staff of its own, it is
                               dependent on support from HHS and DOT. However, neither department
                               currently highlights the coordination of services for the transportation-
                               disadvantaged as a priority in its long-term strategic plan or annual
                               performance plan. According to GPRA guidance, agencies are encouraged
                               to identify programs with common purposes or crosscutting issues in their
                               strategic plans. In addition, the agencies’ annual performance plans should
                               identify performance goals that reflect activities being undertaken to
                               support programs of a crosscutting nature, and show evidence of
                               coordination among crosscutting programs.31 DOT’s most recent strategic
                               plan and performance plan do not explicitly mention the Coordinating
                               Council, although both briefly discuss coordinating special-needs
                               transportation with other federal agencies under DOT’s Job Access and
                               Reverse Commute (JARC) program. However, there is no mention of
                               coordination of DOT’s Transit Capital Assistance Program for Elderly


                               29
                                P.L. 103-62.
                               30
                                 U.S. General Accounting Office, Agencies’ Strategic Plans Under GPRA: Key Questions
                               to Facilitate Congressional Review, GAO/GGD-10.1.16 (Washington, D.C.: May 1, 1997).
                               31
                                U.S. General Accounting Office, The Results Act: An Evaluator’s Guide to Assessing
                               Agency Annual Performance Plans, GAO/GGD-10.1.20 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 1, 1998).




                               Page 25                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                Persons and Persons with Disabilities with other programs for elderly or
                                disabled populations.32 At the subagency level, the Federal Transit
                                Administration’s strategic plan includes the Coordinating Council in an
                                appendix on coordination of crosscutting functions, under the strategic
                                goal of promoting economic growth and trade, and its performance plan
                                mentions working with the Council under a different goal—that of
                                promoting mobility and accessibility.33

                                HHS’s current strategic plan does not discuss coordination of
                                transportation services with other agencies, but its draft plan for 2003-2008
                                specifically lists DOT and state and local transportation and human service
                                agencies as important partners in providing transportation to access
                                services in distressed communities and for health care and employment
                                and training programs elsewhere. Education, DOL, HUD, and VA are not
                                listed, however.34 The performance plans of individual HHS components
                                vary widely in their treatment of transportation coordination. For
                                example, the performance plan of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
                                does not mention transportation at all, while the Administration on Aging’s
                                performance plan states that the agency works closely with HHS and DOT
                                officials on the Coordinating Council in pursuit of improved transportation
                                services.

                                The strategic and annual performance plans of the other federal agencies
                                that fund transportation services for the transportation-disadvantaged
                                generally do not mention coordination of such services.

Other Federal Agencies Are      Other federal agencies are also involved in some coordination efforts
Involved in Some Coordination   outside the scope of the Council. For example, DOL is working with CTAA
Efforts                         and DOT to implement several rounds of pilot projects testing various
                                transportation strategies in support of local one-stop employment and




                                32
                                 U.S. Department of Transportation, Strategic Plan 2000-2005 (September 2000) and U.S.
                                Department of Transportation, Performance Plan-FY 2004 (Washington, D.C.: February
                                2003).
                                33
                                 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration, Strategic Plan 1998-
                                2002 (Washington, D.C.: March 1998) and U.S. Department of Transportation Federal
                                Transit Administration FY 2002 Performance Plan.
                                34
                                 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, draft of Strategic Plan Fiscal Years
                                2003-2008, Appendix A (Washington, D.C.: July 2002).




                                Page 26                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
training centers.35 Officials from DOT and DOL are also in the process of
developing guidelines for using Workforce Investment Act funds (a DOL
program) for Job Access purposes (a DOT program). In addition, some of
DOL’s research studies and technical assistance materials provide
examples of transportation coordination efforts.36 However, we did not
find examples of involvement in transportation coordination efforts at the
national level at the Departments of Education, HUD, and VA, although
some of these agencies are involved in transportation working groups in
some of the federal regional offices. The membership of the Coordinating
Council only consists of DOT and HHS officials, representing less than half
of the 62 federal programs that can be used to fund services for the
transportation-disadvantaged. Although these two agencies comprise the
majority of funding for transportation that we were able to identify, the
Departments of Labor and Education also have a significant number of
programs—more than one-third of the total—that provide services to the
transportation-disadvantaged. Officials from the Council said that other
agencies had expressed interest in coordination activities and had been
invited to observe Council meetings in the past, but only DOL sent a
representative for a short time period.37 Council officials said it would be
very beneficial to have other agencies formally involved in their
coordination efforts, which would require a renewal of the Council’s
charter and memorandums of understanding among all agencies involved
as well as other formal mechanisms to ensure that the proper people are
engaged in the effort.




35
  In an effort to coordinate service delivery for employment and training programs, the
Workforce Investment Act established one-stop centers in all states. Individuals seeking
employment opportunities and training can receive services from more than a dozen
federal programs that are required to offer their services through these one-stop centers.
36
 See “One-Stop Innovations: Leading Change under the WIA One-Stop System,” a report
prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor by the John H. Heldrich Center for Workforce
Development at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey (Mar. 12, 2002).
37
  In addition, one of DOL’s divisions in 2001 had a liaison to the Council’s Technical
Committee—which focused on coordinating employment programs for low-income
individuals. However, the DOL liaison indicated that little activity ensued after the liaison
briefed the committee on the one-stop centers, and the committee later went dormant with
the change in administration.




Page 27                                          GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                             Although some federal, state, and local agencies encourage the
Officials Cited              coordination of services for the transportation-disadvantaged and some
Numerous Obstacles           coordination efforts have been established, federal, state, and local
                             officials, as well as representatives of national advocacy and industry
to Successfully              organizations with whom we spoke, identified numerous obstacles that
Coordinating Services        impede effective coordination. We clustered the wide range of identified
                             obstacles into three categories related to (1) sharing vehicles and the low
and Provided                 priority given to funding coordination activities; (2) programmatic
Potential Options to         differences; and (3) limited federal, state, and local leadership and
Mitigate Them                commitment to undertake and sustain coordination efforts. To mitigate
                             these obstacles, these officials and other experts suggested three potential
                             options: harmonizing standards and requirements among federal programs
                             with a transportation component, providing and disseminating additional
                             guidance and information on coordination, and providing financial
                             incentives or mandates to coordinate.


Officials May Be Reluctant   One set of obstacles was related to officials’ reluctance to share vehicles
to Share Vehicles and        or their tendency to give low priority to funding coordination activities. In
Provide Financial            addition, some areas have limited transportation services available, thus
                             limiting any opportunities to benefit from coordination.
Resources for
Coordination

Apprehension about Sharing   In interviews in every state we visited, as well as with national advocacy
Vehicles                     and industry organizations, the unwillingness or inability to share vehicles
                             was identified as a major obstacle. Administrators of some federal
                             programs may be apprehensive about sharing vehicles for coordination
                             due, in part, to their belief that only they understand their clients’ needs
                             and can provide the necessary personalized services. For example,
                             program administrators reported being concerned about a loss of control
                             over the quality and convenience of transportation services for their
                             clients and wanted to maintain their discretion over how to serve their
                             clients and which transportation resources to purchase. Program
                             administrators also expressed concern over mixing vulnerable
                             populations, such as the developmentally disabled and children, or frail,
                             sick, and healthy populations, in one coordinated system. According to a
                             report on coordinated transportation systems, this reluctance among
                             providers to cooperate can lead to an underutilization of vehicles.38


                             38
                              Moss Adams, LLP, Community Transportation Association of America, The Coordination
                             Challenge (Seattle, WA: June 2000).



                             Page 28                                     GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                Likewise, some human service clients may be apprehensive about using
                                coordinated transportation because they may be uncomfortable mixing
                                with members of other populations with whom they are unfamiliar or they
                                may fear a loss of accommodation or convenience, such as having to
                                switch from door-to-door service to curb-to-curb service or public transit.

Low Priority Given to Funding   The overall costs of coordination, which can include additional staff
Coordination Activities         members and staff time needed for maintaining and overseeing
                                coordination efforts, can be significant. For example, a transportation
                                brokerage firm in one state faced substantial added costs when it began
                                coordinating transportation for human services programs due to
                                requirements to meet more stringent state and federal safety standards.
                                However, some officials stated that the low priority given to funding
                                coordination activities could impede coordination efforts. For example,
                                according to officials in one state, although recipients of funds from DOT’s
                                Capital Assistance Program for Elderly Persons and Persons with
                                Disabilities are required to coordinate with other local transportation
                                services provided from federal sources, the program’s current allotment
                                for administrative expenses would not support any staff to work on
                                coordination activities. In addition, some states invest in coordination,
                                while others do not allocate funds specifically for coordination, and efforts
                                to coordinate often become ancillary activities for those involved.

Limited Transportation          Guidelines issued by the Coordinating Council state that coordination will
Services Available to Realize   not solve all transportation problems in all communities.39 Coordination
Benefits from Coordination      may not be an effective strategy in those communities that have limited
                                transportation services available, particularly in those communities that
                                are not served by public transportation. For example, in some remote
                                areas—such as the northwestern part of South Dakota where services
                                available to many communities are 40 to 60 miles away—there are few
                                transportation services available to transport individuals to hospitals or
                                other services. In these areas, coordination may not be a workable or cost-
                                effective option.




                                39
                                 Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility, Planning Guidelines for Coordinated
                                State and Local Specialized Transportation Services (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 20, 2000).




                                Page 29                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Differing Program             Coordinating multiple programs administered at various levels of
Requirements Can Impede       government is complicated because the programs have different
Coordination                  requirements with respect to eligibility, funding, reporting, and safety; and
                              they differ in their programmatic goals and missions.

Different Eligibility         Federal program rules that specify the eligible populations that each
Requirements                  program can serve may limit opportunities for collaboration. For example,
                              DOT officials in one region stated that they were unable to combine DOL
                              and DOT funds for a DOT transportation program for migrant farm
                              workers because DOL funds are designated for U.S. citizens, while there is
                              no such restriction on the use of DOT funds. In addition, some liability
                              insurance policies specify that a program’s vehicles may serve only a
                              certain population, thus those programs face additional insurance costs to
                              transport individuals other than program clients. Such restrictions may
                              lead to inefficient transportation services within a community. For
                              example, an official in one state we visited commented that one agency’s
                              vehicle provided medically related trips three times per week to that
                              agency’s clients, but would not transport other individuals seeking similar
                              medical services provided under other federal programs due, in part, to
                              liability insurance restrictions. Safety requirements may also vary by
                              program and jurisdiction, thus complicating efforts to transport multiple
                              client groups. Some programs, such as Head Start, have specific vehicle
                              standards that are often more stringent than those of other programs,
                              making it difficult to share vehicles. For instance, different standards for
                              roof strength, types of seat belts, and driver qualifications pose problems
                              for schools, human service agencies, and public transit providers
                              interested in sharing vehicles. Some areas have been able to overcome
                              specific program rules to share vehicles. For example, a Head Start
                              grantee in one state we visited was able to transport students using
                              vehicles supplied by the local public transit provider because these
                              vehicles met the same safety standards as school buses.

Varying Funding Streams and   Funding streams and cycles vary across federal programs, making
Cycles                        coordination more difficult. For example, DOT funds generally flow from
                              the state to counties or cities, while DOL funds flow through the state to
                              local designees. In addition, funding for programs such as Head Start flow
                              directly to grantees rather than through states, making it more difficult for
                              the states to directly manage the coordination activities of local grantees,
                              according to an official in one state. There is also complexity in working
                              with different funding time frames and cycles under multiple federal
                              programs. For example, although DOT’s JARC program allows grantees to
                              use other federal funds to provide the local “match” required to obtain



                              Page 30                                  GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                              JARC funds, the funding time frames and cycles of these other funding
                              sources are different, complicating efforts to combine financial resources.

Lack of Uniform Data          Different reporting requirements among programs can create excessive
Collection and Reporting      paperwork in a coordinated system and may make it difficult for agencies
Requirements among Programs   to determine their true transportation costs and the benefits that may be
                              realized from coordination. For example, one report commented that a
                              transit provider was required to give each of several human service
                              agencies a separate bill for services provided, which reflected the unique
                              requirements imposed by each of those agencies.40 Furthermore, according
                              to officials, Medicaid requires the state Medicaid agency to demonstrate
                              that individuals receiving transportation under Medicaid are not receiving
                              transportation from any other source and that the transportation is
                              medically necessary, complicating the determination of how to fund
                              transportation services for each Medicaid recipient in a coordinated
                              system in which costs are shared among agencies. In addition, human
                              service agencies and providers may not be required or accustomed to
                              collecting complete and uniform transportation data for their programs. A
                              recent report concluded that such information was beneficial because it
                              enabled administrators to re-evaluate how best to provide transportation
                              services and the savings they could achieve through coordination.41 For
                              example, when Florida’s statewide coordination program was established,
                              state and local agencies in Florida reported their total estimated annual
                              transportation-related expenditures at $8 million. However, once reporting
                              requirements were in place for all agencies providing services for the
                              transportation-disadvantaged, actual expenditures were estimated to total
                              $224.9 million statewide—much higher than the initial estimate. Such
                              information has helped agencies in Florida understand the true costs of
                              providing transportation and has encouraged some agencies to become
                              more interested in coordination as they realize the potential for cost
                              savings.

Distinct Purposes and Goals   Unlike transportation agencies, human service agencies provide
among Agencies                transportation as a secondary service so that their clients may access
                              primary human services. Therefore, while DOT-funded transportation
                              agencies have specific and relatively uniform federal requirements for


                              40
                               Ecosometrics, Inc., Recommended Framework for Developing State and Local Human
                              Services Transportation Planning Guidance (Bethesda, MD: Sept. 22, 1998).
                              41
                               Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Innovative State and Local Planning for
                              Coordinated Transportation (U.S. Department of Transportation, February 2002).




                              Page 31                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                   transportation planning, human service agencies do not typically conduct
                                   transportation planning or collect transportation-related data for their
                                   programs, making the planning of coordinated transportation between
                                   transit and human service agencies challenging.42 In addition, human
                                   service, transportation, medical, and workforce agencies all have distinct
                                   technical languages and cultures, which may inhibit collaboration among
                                   these agencies. In one state we visited, the labor and transportation
                                   departments experienced difficulty collaborating because some common
                                   terms have completely different meanings within each agency. For
                                   example, transportation officials interpreted the term “cost-allocation” as
                                   an accounting methodology to estimate the overall cost of operating
                                   transportation services in order to determine the appropriate rate to
                                   charge for these services, while state labor officials interpreted the term as
                                   a way to determine what proportion of overall costs will be funded by
                                   each agency.


Program Officials May Not          Although some federal and state agencies have recognized the potential
Know How to Coordinate             offered by coordination and provided some assistance toward this end,
Effectively                        officials we interviewed expressed concerns about the amount and
                                   effectiveness of the guidance they have received on coordination. In
                                   addition, the absence of interagency forums or other mechanisms to
                                   develop and share information about coordination initiatives limits the
                                   support that local providers receive to effectively coordinate.

Limited Federal Guidance and       Officials in some states we visited said that they receive little federal
Information on Coordination        guidance on potential strategies to coordinate services. As a result, they
                                   develop their own approaches without the benefit of guidance on the most
                                   effective way to coordinate services. We found the following examples of
                                   this in our work:

                               •   Officials in one state said that the guidance on how to share costs among
                                   programs for projects funded jointly by DOT’s JARC grants, HHS’s TANF
                                   Program, and DOL’s Welfare-to-Work Program funds did not indicate how
                                   such sharing could or should be done. Instead, the officials had to seek
                                   advice from other states.




                                   42
                                    Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Innovative State and Local Planning for
                                   Coordinated Transportation.




                                   Page 32                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                               •   While FTA disseminated coordination guidelines for FTA and HHS
                                   programs to transportation officials, some HHS and transportation
                                   officials said these guidelines were not widely disseminated to human
                                   services officials or programs.

                               •   According to state Medicaid offices and a national organization of
                                   individuals and agencies concerned with human services, the Centers for
                                   Medicare & Medicaid Services have not provided sufficient guidance on
                                   how to coordinate Medicaid transportation with existing public transit or
                                   other transportation resources.

                               •   The Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility has limited visibility for
                                   agencies actually involved in implementing coordination efforts. In several
                                   states, human service program administrators with whom we spoke were
                                   not aware of the Council or its Web site.

Limited State Guidance and         In the five states we visited—even in those states with a coordinating
Leadership on Coordination         body—there was limited state guidance to help local areas implement
                                   coordination, and some officials stated that the lack of leadership and
                                   commitment at the state level was a major obstacle to local coordination.
                                   In addition, while some states have established coordinating councils or
                                   bodies or have designated a lead agency for coordination, nearly half of
                                   the states have no coordinating body, according to one report.43 Officials in
                                   one state explained that the lack of a coordinating body that requires
                                   various agencies to discuss and resolve transportation issues is the main
                                   obstacle toward a more coordinated system.

Limited Local Leadership and       Even in states with a coordinating council or a lead state agency, there
Commitment to Coordinate           may be a lack of local leadership or commitment to coordination efforts.
                                   For example, one city we visited was unsuccessful in achieving a
                                   coordinated system despite state encouragement to coordinate and some
                                   state-provided technical assistance. Stakeholders there described a lack of
                                   local commitment and leadership in maintaining lines of communication
                                   among those involved in coordination efforts as a factor leading to the
                                   failure. In addition, program administrators may not have data on the
                                   extent of existing transportation services that may be available to their
                                   clients within a geographic region and, therefore, may fail to realize the
                                   extent of overlapping and complementary services within their local area.
                                   Such data can produce improvements. For example, in response to a lack



                                   43
                                    Westat, Toolkit for Rural Community Coordinated Transportation Services.




                                   Page 33                                     GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                             of data on local services, an agency in one state we visited took the lead in
                             conducting a study that showed the extent to which various agencies
                             provide similar transportation services within a geographic region. An
                             agency official was hopeful that once other agencies saw the extent of
                             overlap, they would be more willing to coordinate.


Potential Options to         Federal, state, and local officials, as well as experts in the area, have
Improve Coordination         suggested three potential options to improve coordination of
                             transportation services among federal programs: (1) harmonizing
                             standards and requirements among federal programs, (2) expanding
                             interagency forums and providing and disseminating additional guidance
                             and information on coordination, and (3) providing financial incentives or
                             coordination mandates.

Harmonizing Program          Officials and experts expressed a need to harmonize requirements among
Standards and Requirements   federal programs, such as providing more flexible regulatory language that
                             would allow providers to serve additional client groups, creating
                             consistent cost accounting methods, and adopting common safety
                             standards. For example, one official commented that federal program
                             regulations could include language permitting other client groups to make
                             use of available transportation options. Also, some officials believed that
                             adopting standard accounting procedures among all federal human service
                             programs could provide a consistent measure for comparing services,
                             allowing administrators to evaluate how best to provide transportation
                             services and determine the savings they could achieve through
                             coordination. Likewise, making standards for safety (e.g., types of seat
                             belts), driver training, and liability insurance provisions uniform among
                             federal human service programs, as appropriate, may facilitate the shared
                             use of vehicles and drivers in one coordinated system, according to some
                             officials. Finally, some officials suggested that federal grant programs that
                             allow the use of funds from multiple sources should be under the same
                             funding cycle or time frame so that these funds may be combined more
                             easily. These officials also commented that harmonizing the time frames
                             under which federal funding is allocated could possibly aid collaborative
                             planning. However, differing program standards exist to ensure that the
                             distinct needs of specific target populations are adequately served and that
                             agencies maintain accountability for providing these services. Thus, the
                             benefits from any change in standards or requirements would need to be
                             balanced against continuing to properly meet client needs and sufficiently
                             control funds distributed to grantees. In addition, harmonizing program
                             standards and requirements among 62 federal programs authorized by
                             more than 20 pieces of legislation would necessitate extensive legislative


                             Page 34                                  GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                     changes and could impose additional costs for agencies to meet new
                                     requirements.

Expanding Interagency Forums         Some officials advocated expanding the number of agencies involved in
and Providing and                    coordination, establishing interagency forums, and improving central
Disseminating Additional             clearinghouses as ways to better develop and disseminate guidance on
Guidance and Information on          coordination. To enhance coordination efforts at the federal level, some
Coordination                         officials suggested expanding the membership of the Coordinating Council
                                     on Access and Mobility to include additional federal agencies, so that a
                                     broader array of agencies that serve the transportation-disadvantaged are
                                     represented. This could include agencies such as DOL and the Department
                                     of Education that we identified as being significant because a large
                                     number of their programs authorize funding of transportation services for
                                     the transportation-disadvantaged. In addition, establishing state-level
                                     forums may also facilitate communication among agencies involved in
                                     coordination and can lead to benefits. For example, one state has
                                     established an interagency task force on transportation coordination,
                                     which has resulted in a number of benefits—including the pooling of
                                     vehicles and the expansion of services—in some areas of the state. Some
                                     officials and experts suggested that federal agencies provide additional
                                     guidance and other information that result from forums or other sources
                                     to clearly define the allowable uses of funds, assist agencies in developing
                                     cost-sharing arrangements for transporting common clientele, and
                                     encourage the establishment and participation in interagency forums. This
                                     additional guidance and information could be better disseminated through
                                     a central clearinghouse, such as the Coordinating Council’s Web site.

Providing Financial Incentives       Some officials and experts believed that incentives or mandates could help
or Mandates                          improve coordination, although others expressed concerns that such
                                     actions would have negative effects on the ability of local agencies to
                                     respond to community needs. Officials provided several examples,
                                     including the following:

                                 •   Federal grant applications could contain provisions giving priority in
                                     funding to those grantees committed to coordination efforts.

                                 •   With legislative changes, current funds allotted by multiple federal sources
                                     could be combined into one federal, state, or local fund for transportation
                                     services for the transportation-disadvantaged.

                                 •   Funding opportunities could be tied to federal or state coordination
                                     mandates so that there are financial consequences for a failure to
                                     coordinate.



                                     Page 35                                 GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
              However, officials pointed out that these options also had some potential
              downsides that would need to be carefully considered. For example,
              combining funds into a single source could result in some populations
              being unfairly overlooked because smaller agencies at the state or local
              level would be at a disadvantage in competing for funding with larger
              agencies serving more clients. Several officials also raised concerns about
              mandates to coordinate. For example, some officials said that mandates
              might reduce the flexibility of agencies to design and deliver
              transportation services that specifically address their communities’ needs.
              In addition, some officials noted that state efforts or mandates might not
              guarantee successful local coordination. For example, a city in one state
              we visited was unsuccessful in coordinating its multiple transportation
              services despite state encouragement to do so and despite losing some
              federal funding as a result.


              Successful coordination among programs for the transportation-
Conclusions   disadvantaged is not a simple matter. One clear need, given the sheer
              number of programs involved, is active and sustained leadership at the
              federal level. While the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility is
              positioned to supply that leadership, its efforts are constrained in two
              main ways. The first is limited membership: only two departments—DOT
              and HHS—are members. While these departments administer nearly 30
              programs that can be used for transportation, the Departments of
              Education and Labor administer almost as many. The absence of
              Education and Labor lessens the ability to muster a collective effort for
              greater coordination. The second constraint is a limited ability to translate
              a strategic vision into a set of actions. At present, there are no clear links
              between the long-term goals in the Council’s strategic plan and the
              individual tasks in its action plan. Without such links, the Council risks
              judging its progress on the basis of activities undertaken rather than on
              the outcomes of those activities and their contribution toward achieving
              long-term goals. Linking these goals and actions to the strategic and
              annual performance plans of participating departments—because the
              Council relies heavily on support from its member agencies—would
              provide an additional incentive to pursue coordination activities in the
              departments’ activities.

              There is great diversity in the specific suggestions we received about how
              to overcome obstacles to greater coordination. Two of the three main
              options raised by various officials we interviewed—making federal
              program standards more uniform and creating some type of requirement
              or financial incentive for coordination—would require substantial


              Page 36                                  GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                           statutory or regulatory changes and include potential costs. The third
                           option, expanding forums and disseminating guidance, can be done in the
                           context of existing laws, regulations, and procedures, and may, therefore,
                           be the most expeditious starting point. In this regard, clarification from
                           federal agencies about how funds can be used for coordination could help
                           state and local agencies overcome some of the obstacles identified.
                           Similarly, state and local agencies may be in a better position to
                           coordinate efforts if they have more knowledge about what has worked
                           elsewhere. Although the Council has a Web site with information about
                           coordinating transportation services, some state and local officials were
                           unaware of it. State and local officials’ point of contact is more likely to be
                           the Web site of the department administering the program at the federal
                           level. Establishing better links between the Council’s Web site and the
                           sites of the departments could help connect grantees with information that
                           may help them coordinate with other programs, better serve clients, and
                           use funds more efficiently.


                       •   To increase communication and collaboration among the major agencies
Recommendations            involved in providing transportation services for the transportation-
for Executive Action       disadvantaged, we recommend that the Secretaries of the Departments of
                           Labor and Education join the Coordinating Council on Access and
                           Mobility.

                       •   To promote and enhance federal, state, and local transportation
                           coordination activities, we recommend that the Secretaries of the
                           Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, Education, and
                           Transportation take the following actions:

                           •   As member agencies of the Coordinating Council on Access and
                               Mobility, ensure that the long-term goals in the Council’s strategic plan
                               have clear links to the individual tasks in its action plan and that these
                               actions are tied to measurable annual performance goals.

                           •   Ensure that strategic and annual performance plans discuss their
                               departments’ transportation coordination efforts and incorporate long-
                               term goals and performance measures that address the need for
                               coordination among programs for the transportation-disadvantaged.

                           •   Develop and distribute additional guidance to states and other grantees
                               that encourages coordinated transportation by clearly defining the
                               allowable uses of funds, explaining how to develop cost-sharing
                               arrangements for transporting common clientele, and clarifying



                           Page 37                                   GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                             whether funds can be used to serve individuals other than the
                             program’s target population.

                         •   Link the Web sites of their agencies involved in providing services for
                             the transportation-disadvantaged to the Coordinating Council’s Web
                             site and advertise the site in agency correspondence and during
                             conferences or other outreach opportunities.


                         We provided the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor,
Agency Comments          Education, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and
and Our Evaluation       Veterans Affairs with draft copies of this report for their review and
                         comment. We requested verification of key facts from the Departments of
                         Agriculture and the Interior, but we did not seek comments from these
                         departments because they did not administer significant numbers of
                         programs that benefit the transportation-disadvantaged.

                         All six departments generally agreed with the findings and conclusions in
                         the report and provided technical clarifications, which were incorporated
                         as appropriate. The four departments to whom we made
                         recommendations—Health and Human Services, Labor, Education, and
                         Transportation—also generally concurred with those recommendations. In
                         particular:

                     •   The Department of Health and Human Services provided written
                         comments on the draft of this report which are presented and evaluated in
                         appendix V. The department noted that it has initiated actions to
                         implement our recommendations, including (1) strengthening the linkage
                         between the Coordinating Council’s strategic and action plans, (2)
                         reviewing the department-wide strategic plan for opportunities to reflect
                         its transportation coordination efforts, (3) developing coordination
                         guidance, and (4) linking the Coordinating Council’s Web site to the
                         Department of Health and Human Services’ Web site. The department also
                         suggested that we consider incorporating other researchers’ estimates of
                         transportation spending by health and human service programs. However,
                         we estimated program expenditures only for those programs where there
                         was sufficient evidence to support an estimate.

                     •   Department of Labor officials stated that the department looks forward to
                         joining the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility to improve the
                         transportation services provided by federal human service programs. In
                         addition, department officials commented that the reauthorization of some
                         human service and surface transportation legislation was forthcoming
                         during the preparation of this report and that these legislative changes


                         Page 38                                  GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
    may impact the future directions of the federal programs included in this
    report.

•   The Department of Education provided written comments on the draft of
    this report, which are presented in appendix VI. The department said that
    it would look favorably on an opportunity to join the Coordinating Council
    on Access and Mobility and it would consider developing coordination
    guidance for state and other grantees and instituting methods of linking
    Web-based information resources about transportation.

•   Department of Transportation officials said that the Federal Transit
    Administration is committed to accomplishing effective transportation
    coordination and noted that the list of the agency’s activities and
    accomplishments in appendix III of this report demonstrate its
    commitment and support for coordination. It also stated that the
    administration’s proposal for the reauthorization of surface transportation
    legislation, introduced in May 2003, includes provisions that would
    encourage further coordination efforts.

    We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional
    committees and to the Secretaries and other appropriate officials of the
    Departments of Transportation, Health and Human Services, Labor,
    Education, Housing and Urban Development, Veterans Affairs,
    Agriculture, and the Interior. We also will make copies available to others
    upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the
    GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

    If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at
    siggerudk@gao.gov or at (202) 512-2834. Additional GAO contacts and
    acknowledgments are listed in appendix VII.




    Katherine Siggerud
    Acting Director
    Physical Infrastructure Issues




    Page 39                                 GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
             Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology


             Our scope of work included federal programs that provide transportation
             services to the transportation-disadvantaged. To provide information on
             the purposes and types of such federal programs, we first determined the
             universe of programs by reviewing an existing inventory produced by the
             Community Transportation Association of America1 and a report prepared
             for the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility.2 We then
             supplemented and modified this inventory of programs on the basis of
             interviews with agency officials and searches of the Catalog of Federal
             Domestic Assistance. We included only those programs that provide
             nonemergency, nonmilitary, surface transportation services of any kind,
             targeted to transportation-disadvantaged populations. We interviewed
             program administrators to identify the general target population and the
             types of transportation services and trips that are typically provided under
             each program.

             To address the issues related to program funding, effects of coordination,
             and coordination obstacles and options, we (1) conducted interviews and
             document reviews in the pertinent eight federal agencies that administer
             the 62 federal programs that fund transportation services for the
             transportation-disadvantaged; (2) conducted five case studies in Arizona,
             Florida, New York, South Dakota, and Wisconsin; (3) reviewed the
             literature on the challenges encountered in coordinating services for the
             transportation-disadvantaged; and (4) interviewed industry
             representatives and advocacy groups representing elderly and disabled
             populations. We did not verify spending data or estimates received from
             federal agencies for accuracy.

             At the federal level, we interviewed officials from the headquarters of the
             Federal Transit Administration in the Department of Transportation; the
             Administration on Aging, the Administration for Children and Families, the
             Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Health Resources Services
             Administration, the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, and the Substance
             Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in the Department of
             Health and Human Services; the Employment and Training Administration
             in the Department of Labor; the Department of Agriculture; the
             Department of Education; the Department of Housing and Urban


             1
             Community Transportation Association of America, Building Mobility Partnerships:
             Opportunities for Federal Investment (Washington, D.C.: March 2002).
             2
             Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility, Planning Guidelines for State and Local
             Coordination (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 20, 2000).




             Page 40                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology




Development; the Department of the Interior; and the Department of
Veterans Affairs. We also interviewed federal officials from the 10 regional
offices of the Federal Transit Administration and some regional officials in
the Departments of Health and Human Services and Labor. The federal
officials we met with included representatives of the Coordinating Council
on Access and Mobility from the Federal Transit Administration and the
Department of Health and Human Services.

In conducting our case studies in the five states, we reviewed
documentation and interviewed more than 100 officials from state and
local transportation and human service agencies and service providers, as
well as consumers of transportation services. We judgmentally chose the
states to include three states without a state mandate or state coordinating
body and two states with such conditions. We also chose states on the
basis of relative concentrations of elderly, disabled, and low-income
populations, and for some, geographic dispersion. Within each state, we
spoke with state officials responsible for coordinating transportation
services for the transportation-disadvantaged and/or overseeing funds
from the 62 federal programs we identified. We also asked some of these
state officials for recommendations of local officials and transportation
providers to interview in a range of urban, suburban, and rural areas and
coordinated and uncoordinated programs within the state.

Finally, we interviewed representatives of professional, industry, and
advocacy organizations that are part of the National Consortium on the
Coordination of Human Services Transportation, a group that represents a
broad spectrum of stakeholders involved with coordination of
transportation for the disadvantaged. We conducted our work from July
2002 through June 2003 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.




Page 41                                 GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                        Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                        Providing Transportation Services to the
                                        Transportation-Disadvantaged


Providing Transportation Services to the
Transportation-Disadvantaged

                                        U.S. Code                                               Target
                                        provisions          Typical uses as   Types of trips    population as    Fiscal year
                       Popular title of authorizing         reported by       as reported       defined by       2001 federal
                       authorizing      funds for           program           by program        program          spending on
Program                legislation      transportation      officials         officials         officialsa       transportationb
Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service
                                                                                                                             c
Food Stamp             Food Stamp Act    7 U.S.C. §         Reimbursement     To access         Low-income     $12,952,956
Employment and         of 1977, as       2015(d)(4)(I)(i)   or advanced       education,        persons
Training Program       amended           (I)                payment for       training,         between the
                                                            gasoline          employment        ages of 16 and
                                                            expenses or bus   services, and     59
                                                            fare              employment
                                                                              placements
Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
21st-Century          No Child Left      20 U.S.C. §    Contract for          To access         Students from    $84,600,000
                                                                                                                            d
Community Learning    Behind Act of      7173(a)(10)    service               educational       low-income       (estimate)
Centers               2001                                                    services          families
Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement
Voluntary Public       No Child Left     20 U.S.C. §    Contract for       To access            Students from    New program, no
School Choice          Behind Act of     7225a(a)       services,          educational          under-           actual data or
                       2001                             purchase and       services and         performing       estimate
                                                        operate vehicles, programs              schools who      available from
                                                        hire bus drivers                        choose to        the federal
                                                        and                                     transfer to      agency
                                                        transportation                          higher
                                                        directors,                              performing
                                                        purchase bus                            schools
                                                        passes, redesign
                                                        transportation
                                                        plans including
                                                        new routing
                                                        systems, offer
                                                        professional
                                                        development for
                                                        bus drivers
Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
Assistance for        Individuals with   20 U.S.C. §§   Purchase and       To access            Children with    No actual data or
Education of All      Disabilities       1401(a)(22),   operate vehicles, educational           disabilities     estimate
Children with         Education Act      1411(a)(1)     contract for       services                              available from
Disabilities                                            service                                                  the federal
                                                                                                                 agency
Centers for            Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§    Referral,            To access         Persons with a   No actual data or
Independent Living     Investment Act of 796f-4(b)(3)    assistance, and      program           significant      estimate
                       1998              and 705(18)(xi) training in the      services          disability       available from
                                                         use of public                                           the federal
                                                         transportation                                          agency




                                        Page 42                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                        Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                        Providing Transportation Services to the
                                        Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                         U.S. Code                                           Target
                                         provisions       Typical uses as   Types of trips   population as    Fiscal year
                       Popular title of  authorizing      reported by       as reported      defined by       2001 federal
                       authorizing       funds for        program           by program       program          spending on
Program                legislation       transportation   officials         officials        officialsa       transportationb
Independent Living     Workforce         29 U.S.C. §      Referral,         To access        Persons aged     No actual data or
Services for Older     Investment Act of 796k(e)(5)       assistance, and   program          55 or older      estimate
Individuals Who Are    1998                               training in the   services, for    who have         available from
Blind                                                     use of public     general trips    significant      the federal
                                                          transportation                     visual           agency
                                                                                             impairment
Independent Living     Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§   Referral,         To access          Persons with a   No actual data or
State Grants           Investment Act of 796e-2(1) and  assistance, and   program            significant      estimate
                       1998              705(18)(xi)    training in the   services,          disability       available from
                                                        use of public     employment                          the federal
                                                        transportation    opportunities                       agency
Supported Employment Workforce             29 U.S.C. §§ Transit subsidies To access          Persons with     No actual data or
Services for Individuals Investment Act of 795g and     for public and    employment         most             estimate
with Most Significant    1998              705(36)      private           placements,        significant      available from
Disabilities                                            transportation    employment         disabilities     the federal
                                                        (e.g. bus, taxi,  services, and                       agencye
                                                        and paratransit), vocational
                                                        training in the   rehabilitation
                                                        use of public     services
                                                        transportation
Vocational               Rehabilitation    29 U.S.C. §  Transit subsidies To access          Persons with     $50,700,000
Rehabilitation Grants    Act of 1973, as   723(a)(8)    for public and    employment         physical or      (estimate)e
                         amended                        private           placements,        mental
                                                        transportation    employment         impairments
                                                        (e.g. bus, taxi,  services, and
                                                        and paratransit), vocational
                                                        training in the   rehabilitation
                                                        use of public     services
                                                        transportation
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families
Child Care and           Child Care and    42 U.S.C. §  States rarely use To access          Children from    $0 (estimate)f
Development Fund         Development       9858c        CCDF funds for    child care         low-income
                         Block Grant Act                transportation    services           families
                         of 1990, as                    and only under
                         amended                        very
                                                        restricted
                                                        circumstances
Community Services       Community         42 U.S.C. §  Taxi vouchers,    General trips      Low-income       No actual data or
Block Grant Programs Opportunities,        9904         bus tokens                           persons          estimate
                         Accountability,                                                                      available from
                         Training, and                                                                        the federal
                         Educational                                                                          agency
                         Services Act of
                         1998




                                        Page 43                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                                Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                                Providing Transportation Services to the
                                                Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                                U.S. Code                                              Target
                                                provisions       Typical uses as     Types of trips    population as   Fiscal year
                           Popular title of     authorizing      reported by         as reported       defined by      2001 federal
                           authorizing          funds for        program             by program        program         spending on
Program                    legislation          transportation   officials           officials         officialsa      transportationb
Developmental              Developmental        42 U.S.C. §§     Transportation      General trips     Persons with    No actual data or
Disabilities Projects of   Disabilities         15002,           information,                          developmental   estimate
National Significance      Assistance and       15081(2)(D)      feasibility                           disabilities    available from
                           Bill of Rights Act                    studies, planning                                     the federal
                           of 2000                                                                                     agencyg
Head Start                 Augustus F.          42 USCA §        Purchase and        To access         Children from   $514,500,000
                                                                                                                                  h
                           Hawkins Human        9835(a)(3)(C)    operate vehicles,   educational       low-income      (estimate)
                           Services             (ii)             contract with       services          families
                           Reauthorization                       transportation
                           Act of 1990                           providers,
                                                                 coordinate with
                                                                 local education
                                                                 agencies
Refugee and Entrant        Refugee Act of       8 U.S.C. §§      Bus passes          To access         Refugees        No actual data or
Assistance                 1980, as             1522(b)(7)(D),                       employment                        estimate
Discretionary Grants       amended              1522(c)                              and                               available from
                                                                                     educational                       the federal
                                                                                     services                          agency
Refugee and Entrant   Refugee Act of            8 U.S.C. §§      Bus passes          To access         Refugees        No actual data or
Assistance State      1980, as                  1522(b)(7)(D),                       employment                        estimate
Administered Programs amended                   1522(c)                              and                               available from
                                                                                     educational                       the federal
                                                                                     services                          agency
Refugee and Entrant        Refugee Act of       8 U.S.C. §§      Bus passes          To access         Refugees        No actual data or
Assistance Targeted        1980, as             1522(b)(7)(D),                       employment                        estimate
Assistance                 amended              1522(c)                              and                               available from
                                                                                     educational                       the federal
                                                                                     services                          agency
Refugee and Entrant        Refugee Act of       8 U.S.C. §§      Bus passes          To access         Refugees        No actual data or
Assistance Voluntary       1980, as             1522(b)(7)(D),                       employment                        estimate
Agency Programs            amended              1522(c)                              and                               available from
                                                                                     educational                       the federal
                                                                                     services                          agency
Social Services Block      Social Security      42 U.S.C. §      Any                 To access         States          $18,459,393
Grants                     Act, as amended      1397a(a)(2)(A)   transportation-     medical or        determine
                                                                 related use         social services   what
                                                                                                       categories of
                                                                                                       families and
                                                                                                       children




                                                Page 44                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                            Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                            Providing Transportation Services to the
                                            Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                            U.S. Code                                            Target
                                            provisions Typical uses as          Types of trips   population as      Fiscal year
                       Popular title of     authorizingreported by              as reported      defined by         2001 federal
                       authorizing          funds for  program                  by program       program            spending on
Program                legislation          transportation
                                                       officials                officials        officialsa         transportationb
State Councils on      Developmental        42 U.S.C. §§
                                                       State Councils           All or general   Persons with       $786,605 (partial
Developmental          Disabilities         15002, 15025
                                                       provide small            trips            developmental      outlay)i
Disabilities and       Assistance and                  grants and                                disabilities and
Protection and         Bill of Rights Act              contracts to local                        family
Advocacy Systems       of 2000                         organizations to                          members
                                                       establish
                                                       transportation
                                                       projects or
                                                       collaborate in
                                                       improving
                                                       transportation for
                                                       people with
                                                       disabilities;
                                                       Protection and
                                                       Advocacy
                                                       Systems ensure
                                                       that people with
                                                       disabilities have
                                                       access to public
                                                       transportation as
                                                       required by law
Temporary Assistance Personal             42 U.S.C. §§ Any use that is          General trips    No assistance $160,462,214
                                                                                                                                 j
for Needy Families     Responsibility     604(a), (k)  reasonably                                is provided to  (partial outlay)
                       and Work                        calculated to                             families
                       Opportunity                     accomplish a                              without a minor
                       Reconciliation                  purpose of the                            child, but
                       Act of 1996, as                 TANF program                              states
                       amended                         and the                                   determine
                                                       allowable                                 specific
                                                       matching portion                          eligibility
                                                       of JARC grants
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Aging
Grants for Supportive  Older Americans 42 U.S.C. §     Contract for             To access        Program is         $72,496,003
Services and Senior    Act of 1965, as    3030d (a)(2) services                 program          targeted to
Centers                amended                                                  services,        persons aged
                                                                                medical, and     60 or over
                                                                                for general
                                                                                trips
Program for American      Older Americans   42 U.S.C. §§     Purchase and       To access        Program is for     No actual data or
Indian, Alaskan Native,   Act of 1965, as   3057,            operate vehicles   program          American           estimate
and Native Hawaiian       amended           3030d(a)(2)                         services,        Indian,            available from
Elders                                                                          medical, and     Alaskan            the federal
                                                                                for general      Native, and        agency
                                                                                trips            Native
                                                                                                 Hawaiian
                                                                                                 elders




                                            Page 45                                       GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                             Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                             Providing Transportation Services to the
                                             Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                        U.S. Code                                                 Target
                                        provisions     Typical uses as Types of trips             population as    Fiscal year
                       Popular title of authorizing    reported by      as reported               defined by       2001 federal
                       authorizing      funds for      program          by program                program          spending on
Program                legislation      transportation officials        officials                 officialsa       transportationb
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Medicaid                   Social Security   42 U.S.C. §§     Bus tokens,         To access       Recipients are   $976,200,000
                                                                                                                              k
                           Act, as amended   1396a,           subway passes,      health care     generally low-   (estimate)
                                             1396n(e)(1)(A)   brokerage           services        income
                                                              services                            persons, but
                                                                                                  states
                                                                                                  determine
                                                                                                  specific
                                                                                                  eligibility
State Children’s Health    Medicare,         42 U.S.C. §§     Any                 To access       Beneficiaries    $4,398,089
Insurance Program          Medicaid, and     1397jj(a)(26),   transportation-     health care     are primarily
                           SCHIP Benefits    (27)             related use         services        children from
                           Improvement                                                            low-income
                           and Protection                                                         families, but
                           Act of 2000                                                            states
                                                                                                  determine
                                                                                                  eligibility
Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration
Community Health       Public Health   42 U.S.C. §       Bus tokens,       To access              Medically        $4,200,000
                                                                                                                              l
Centers                Service Act, as 254b(b)(1)(A)     vouchers,         health care            underserved      (estimate)
                       amended         (iv)              transportation    services               populations
                                                         coordinators, and
                                                         drivers
Healthy Communities    Public Health   42 U.S.C. §       Improve           To access              Uninsured or     No actual data or
Access Program         Service Act, as 256(e)(1)(B)(iii) coordination of   health care            underinsured     estimate
                       amended                           transportation    services               populations      available from
                                                                                                                   the federal
                                                                                                                   agency
Healthy Start Initiative   Public Health     42 U.S.C. §      Bus tokens, taxi    To access       Residents of     No actual data or
                           Service Act, as   254c-8(e)(1)     vouchers,           health care     areas with       estimate
                           amended                            reimbursement       services        significant      available from
                                                              for use of own                      perinatal        the federal
                                                              vehicle                             health           agency
                                                                                                  disparities
HIV Care Formula           Ryan White        42 U.S.C. §§     Bus passes,         To access       Persons with     $19,500,000
                                                                                                                              m
Grants                     Comprehensive     300ff-21(a),     tokens, taxis,      health care     HIV or AIDS      (estimate)
                           AIDS Resources    23(a)(2)(B)      vanpools, vehicle   services
                           Emergency Act                      purchase by
                           of 1990                            providers,
                                                              mileage
                                                              reimbursement
Maternal and Child         Social Security   42 U.S.C. §      Any                 To access       Mothers,         No actual data or
Services Grants            Act, as amended   701(a)(1)(A)     transportation-     health care     infants and      estimate
                                                              related use         services        children,        available from
                                                                                                  particularly     the federal
                                                                                                  from low-        agency
                                                                                                  income
                                                                                                  families




                                             Page 46                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                           Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                           Providing Transportation Services to the
                                           Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                           U.S. Code                                              Target
                                           provisions       Typical uses as    Types of trips     population as      Fiscal year
                        Popular title of   authorizing      reported by        as reported        defined by         2001 federal
                        authorizing        funds for        program            by program         program            spending on
Program                 legislation        transportation   officials          officials          officialsa         transportationb
Rural Health Care,      Health Centers     42 U.S.C. §      Purchase           To access          Medically          No actual data or
Rural Health Network,   Consolidation      254c             vehicles, bus      health care        underserved        estimate
and Small Health Care   Act of 1996                         passes             services           populations in     available from
Provider Programs                                                                                 rural areas        the federal
                                                                                                                     agency
Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Community Mental        ADAMHA             42 U.S.C. §      Any                To access
                                                                                    Adults with                      No actual data or
Health Services Block   Reorganization     300x-1(b)(1)     transportation-    program
                                                                                    mental illness                   estimate
Grant                   Act, as amended                     related use        services
                                                                                    and children                     available from
                                                                                    with emotional                   the federal
                                                                                    disturbance                      agency
Substance Abuse       ADAMHA          42 U.S.C. §     Any             To access     Persons with a                   No actual data or
Prevention and        Reorganization  300x-32(b)      transportation- program       substance                        estimate
Treatment Block Grant Act, as amended                 related use     services      related                          available from
                                                                                    disorder and/or                  the federal
                                                                                    recovering                       agency
                                                                                    from
                                                                                    substance
                                                                                    related
                                                                                    disorder
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and Development
Community               Housing and     42 U.S.C. §         Purchase and       General trips      Program must       $6,761,486
Development Block       Community       5305(a)(8)          operate vehicles                      serve a            (partial outlay)n
Grant                   Development Act                                                           majority of low-
                        of 1974                                                                   income
                                                                                                  persons
Housing Opportunities   AIDS Housing       42 U.S.C. §      Contract for       To access          Low-income         $190,252
for Persons with AIDS   Opportunity Act    12907(a)(3)      services           health care        persons with       (partial outlay)o
                                                                               and other          HIV or AIDS
                                                                               services           and their
                                                                                                  families
Supportive Housing    McKinney-Vento 42 U.S.C. §      Bus tokens, taxi To access                  Homeless           $14,000,000
                                                                                                                                p
Program               Homeless          11385         vouchers,         supportive                persons and        (estimate)
                      Assistance Act of               purchase and      services                  families with
                      1987, as                        operate vehicles                            children
                      amended
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Public and Indian Housing
Revitalization of       Housing and     42 U.S.C. §         Bus tokens, taxi   Trips related to   Residents of       $700,000
Severely Distressed     Community       1437v(l)(3)         vouchers,          employment or      the severely       (estimate)q
Public Housing          Development Act                     contract for       obtaining          distressed
                        of 1992, as                         services           necessary          housing and
                        amended                                                supportive         residents of
                                                                               services           the revitalized
                                                                                                  units




                                           Page 47                                         GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                           Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                           Providing Transportation Services to the
                                           Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                           U.S. Code                                              Target
                                           provisions       Typical uses as     Types of trips    population as    Fiscal year
                        Popular title of   authorizing      reported by         as reported       defined by       2001 federal
                        authorizing        funds for        program             by program        program          spending on
Program                 legislation        transportation   officials           officials         officialsa       transportationb
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs
Indian Employment       Adult Indian       25 U.S.C. §      Gas vouchers        To access         Native           No actual data or
Assistance              Vocational         309                                  training          American         estimate
                        Training Act, as                                                          persons          available from
                        amended                                                                   between the      the federal
                                                                                                  ages of 18 and   agency
                                                                                                  35
Indian Employment,    Indian            25 U.S.C. §   Gas vouchers              Employment-       Low-income       No actual data or
Training and Related  Employment,       3401                                    related           Native           estimate
         r
Services              Training and                                                                American         available from
                      Related Services                                                            persons          the federal
                      Demonstration                                                                                agency
                      Act of 1992
Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration
Job Corps             Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§  Bus tickets               To access Job     Low-income       $21,612,000
                      Investment Act of 2888(a)(1),                             Corps sites       youth
                      1998              2890                                    and
                                                                                employment
                                                                                services
Migrant and Seasonal    Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§      Mileage             To access         Low-income       No actual data or
           s
Farmworker              Investment Act of 2801(46),         reimbursement       employment        persons and      estimate
                        1998              2912(d)                               placements or     their            available from
                                                                                intensive and     dependents       the federal
                                                                                training          who are          agency
                                                                                services          primarily
                                                                                                  employed in
                                                                                                  agricultural
                                                                                                  labor that is
                                                                                                  seasonal or
                                                                                                  migratory
Native American         Workforce         29 U.S.C. §       Bus tokens,         To access         Unemployed       No actual data or
Employment and          Investment Act of 2911(d)(2)        transit passes,     employment        American         estimate
Training                1998                                use of tribal       placements,       Indians and      available from
                                                            vehicles and        employment        other persons    the federal
                                                            grantee staff       services          of Native        agency
                                                            vehicles, mileage                     American
                                                            reimbursement                         descent
                                                            for participants
                                                            operating “car
                                                            pool” services
Senior Community        Older Americans    42 U.S.C. §      Mileage             To access         Low-income       $4,400,000
Service Employment      Act of 1965        3056(c)(6)(A)    reimbursement,      employment        persons aged     (estimate)s
Program                                    (iv)             reimbursement       placements        55 or over
                                                            for travel costs,
                                                            and payment for
                                                            cost of
                                                            transportation




                                           Page 48                                          GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                           Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                           Providing Transportation Services to the
                                           Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                           U.S. Code                                                Target
                                           provisions       Typical uses as      Types of trips     population as      Fiscal year
                        Popular title of   authorizing      reported by          as reported        defined by         2001 federal
                        authorizing        funds for        program              by program         program            spending on
Program                 legislation        transportation   officials            officials          officialsa         transportationb
Trade Adjustment        Trade Act of       19 U.S.C. §      Mileage              To access          Persons found      No actual data or
Assistance - Workers    1974, as           2296(b)          reimbursement,       training           to be impacted     estimate
                        amended                             transit fares                           by foreign         available from
                                                                                                    trade,             the federal
                                                                                                    increased          agency
                                                                                                    imports, or
                                                                                                    shift in
                                                                                                    production
Welfare-to-Work         Personal           42 U.S.C. §      Any                  To access          American           No actual data or
Grants to Federally     Responsibility     612(a)(3)(C)     transportation-      employment         Indians and        estimate
Recognized Tribes and   and Work                            related use,         placements,        other persons      available from
Alaska Nativest         Opportunity                         though               employment         of Native          the federal
                        Reconciliation                      purchasing           services           American           agency
                        Act of 1996                         vehicles for                            descent who
                                                            individuals is not                      are long-term
                                                            allowable                               welfare
                                                                                                    recipients or
                                                                                                    are low-income
Welfare-to-Work         Personal           42 U.S.C. §      Any                  To access          Long-term          No actual data or
Grants to States and    Responsibility     603(a)(5)(C)     transportation-      employment         welfare            estimate
           t
Localities              and Work                            related use,         placements,        recipients or      available from
                        Opportunity                         though               employment         low-income         the federal
                        Reconciliation                      purchasing           services           individuals        agency
                        Act of 1996                         vehicles for
                                                            individuals is not
                                                            allowable
Work Incentive Grants   Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§      Encourage            To access          Persons with       No actual data or
                        Investment Act of 2801(46),         collaboration with   one-stop           disabilities who   estimate
                        1998, as          2864(d)(2)        transportation       services           are eligible for   available from
                        amended                             providers                               employment         the federal
                                                                                                    and training       agency
                                                                                                    services
Workforce Investment    Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§      Mileage              To access          Priority must      No actual data or
Act Adult Services      Investment Act of 2801(46),         reimbursement,       training           be given to        estimate
Program                 1998, as          2864(e)(2)        bus tokens,                             people on          available from
                        amended                             vouchers                                assistance and     the federal
                                                                                                    low-income         agency
                                                                                                    individuals
Workforce Investment    Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§      Transportation       To access          Includes           No actual data or
Act Dislocated Worker   Investment Act of 2801(46),         allowance or         transition         workers who        estimate
Program                 1998, as          2864(e)(2)        reimbursement,       assistance in      have been laid     available from
                        amended                             bus/subway           order to find or   off, or have       the federal
                                                            tokens               qualify for new    received an        agency
                                                                                 employment         individual
                                                                                                    notice of
                                                                                                    termination, or
                                                                                                    notice that a
                                                                                                    facility will
                                                                                                    close




                                           Page 49                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                          Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                          Providing Transportation Services to the
                                          Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                          U.S. Code                                                Target
                                          provisions       Typical uses as       Types of trips    population as    Fiscal year
                        Popular title of  authorizing      reported by           as reported       defined by       2001 federal
                        authorizing       funds for        program               by program        program          spending on
Program                 legislation       transportation   officials             officials         officialsa       transportationb
Workforce Investment    Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§     Public                To access         Youth with low   No actual data or
Act Youth Activities    Investment Act of 2801(46),        transportation        training and      individual or    estimate
                        1998, as          2854(a)(4)                             other support     family income    available from
                        amended                                                  services                           the federal
                                                                                                                    agency
Youth Opportunity       Workforce         29 U.S.C. §§     Bus tokens            To access         Youth from       $415,000
                                                                                                                               u
Grants                  Investment Act of 2801(46),                              program           high poverty     (estimate)
                        1998, as          2914(b)                                services          areas,
                        amended                                                                    empowerment
                                                                                                   zones, or
                                                                                                   enterprise
                                                                                                   communities
Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration
Black Lung Benefits     Black Lung        30 U.S.C. §      Mileage               To access       Disabled coal      No actual data or
Program                 Benefits Reform   923              reimbursement,        health services miners             estimate
                        Act of 1977                        transit fares, taxi                                      available from
                                                           vouchers                                                 the federal
                                                                                                                    agencyv
Department of Labor, Veterans Employment and Training Service
Homeless Veterans’    Homeless          38 USCA §§     Bus tokens                To access         Homeless         No actual data or
Reintegration Project Veterans          2011, 2021                               employment        veterans         estimate
                      Comprehensive                                              services                           available from
                      Assistance Act of                                                                             the federal
                      2001                                                                                          agency
Veterans’ Employment Workforce          29 U.S.C. §§   Bus tokens,               To access         Veterans         No actual data or
Program               Investment Act of 2801(46), 2913 minor repairs to          employment                         estimate
                      1998, as                         vehicles                  services                           available from
                      amended                                                                                       the federal
                                                                                                                    agency
Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration
Capital and Training   Title 49           49 U.S.C. §      To make               General trips     Persons with     $2,877,818
Assistance Program for Recodification,    5310             vehicles                                disabilities
Over-the-Road Bus      P.L. 103-272                        wheelchair
Accessibility                                              accessible and
                                                           training required
                                                           by ADA
Capital Assistance      Title 49          49 U.S.C. §      Assistance in         To serve the      Elderly          $174,982,628
Program for Elderly     Recodification,   5310             purchasing            needs of the      persons and
Persons and Persons     P.L. 103-272                       vehicles, contract    elderly and       persons with
with Disabilities                                          for services          persons with      disabilities
                                                                                 disabilities




                                          Page 50                                            GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                            Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                            Providing Transportation Services to the
                                            Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                            U.S. Code                                              Target
                                            provisions       Typical uses as      Types of trips   population as       Fiscal year
                         Popular title of   authorizing      reported by          as reported      defined by          2001 federal
                         authorizing        funds for        program              by program       program             spending on
Program                  legislation        transportation   officials            officials        officialsa          transportationb
Capital Investment       Transportation     49 U.S.C. §      Assistance for       General trips    General public,     $17,500,000
Grants                   Equity Act for the 5309             bus and bus-                          although some       (estimate)w
                         21st Century                        related capital                       projects are for
                                                             projects                              the special
                                                                                                   needs of
                                                                                                   elderly persons
                                                                                                   and persons
                                                                                                   with disabilities
Job Access and           Transportation     49 U.S.C. §      Expand existing      To access        Low income          $85,009,627
Reverse Commute          Equity Act for the 5309 note        public               employment       persons,
                         21st Century                        transportation or    and related      including
                                                             initiate new         services         persons with
                                                             service                               disabilities
Nonurbanized Area        Title 49           49 U.S.C. §      Capital and          General trips    General public,     $0
Formula Program          Recodification,    5311             operating                             although            (partial
                                                                                                                                   x
                         P.L. 103-272                        assistance for                        paratransit         obligation)
                                                             public                                services are
                                                             transportation                        for the special
                                                             service, including                    needs of
                                                             paratransit                           persons with
                                                             services, in                          disabilities
                                                             nonurbanized
                                                             areas

Urbanized Area           Title 49           49 U.S.C. § Capital                   General trips    General public, $36,949,680
Formula Program          Recodification,    5307        assistance, and                            although        (partial
                                                                                                                               y
                         P.L. 103-272, as               some operating                             paratransit     obligation)
                         amended                        assistance for                             services are
                                                        public transit,                            for the special
                                                        including                                  needs of
                                                        paratransit                                persons with
                                                        services, in                               disabilities
                                                        urbanized areas
Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration
Automobiles and       Disabled           38 U.S.C. §    Purchase of               General trips    Veterans and        $33,639,000
Adaptive Equipment forVeterans and       3902           personal                                   service
Certain Disabled      Servicemen’s                      vehicles,                                  members with
Veterans and Members  Automobile                        modifications of                           disabilities
of the Armed Forces   Assistance Act of                 vehicles
                      1970
Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration
VA Homeless           Homeless           38 U.S.C. §    20 vans were              General trips    Homeless            $565,797
Providers Grant and   Veterans           7721 note      purchased under                            veterans
Per Diem Program      Comprehensive                     this program
                      Service
                      Programs Act of
                      1992




                                            Page 51                                         GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                                                  Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
                                                                  Providing Transportation Services to the
                                                                  Transportation-Disadvantaged




                                                                      U.S. Code                                                                   Target
                                                                      provisions            Typical uses as              Types of trips           population as            Fiscal year
                                       Popular title of               authorizing           reported by                  as reported              defined by               2001 federal
                                       authorizing                    funds for             program                      by program               program                  spending on
 Program                               legislation                    transportation        officials                    officials                officialsa               transportationb
 Veterans Medical Care                 Veterans’                      38 U.S.C. §           Mileage                      To access                Veterans with            $126,594,591
 Benefits                              Benefits                       111                   reimbursement,               health care              disabilities or
                                       Improvements                                         contract for                 services                 low incomes
                                       Act of 1994                                          service
 Total (reported or                                                                                                                                                        $2,445,453,139
 estimated spending
 on transportation
 services for the
 transportation-
 disadvantaged)
Sources: GAO analysis of information from the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, Transportation, and Veterans
Affairs; the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility; the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance; the U.S. Code; the Code of Federal Regulations; and the Community Transportation Association of
America.
                                                                  a
                                                                      A supplemental source for the target populations was the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.
                                                                  b
                                                                   Actual outlays or obligations on transportation are given for programs that track this information. All
                                                                  data are outlays, except for the following programs, which are obligations: Capital Investment Grants,
                                                                  Urbanized Area Formula Program, Nonurbanized Area Formula Program, Job Access and Reverse
                                                                  Commute, Capital and Training Assistance for Over-the-Road Bus Accessibility, Capital Assistance
                                                                  Program for Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities, Automobiles and Adaptive Equipment for
                                                                  Certain Disabled Veterans and Members of the Armed Forces, and Veterans Medical Care Benefits.
                                                                  Actual data and estimates are the total for the program, unless otherwise noted as partial outlays or
                                                                  obligations in the table. When actual information was not available, estimates are given based on
                                                                  information provided by program officials or the officials agreed with an estimate made by another
                                                                  source.
                                                                  c
                                                                   According to a program official, outlays for the Food Stamp Employment and Training Program have
                                                                  increased due to changes in the program from the 2002 Farm Bill. The 2002 Farm Bill eliminates the
                                                                  $25 per month cap that the Department of Agriculture will reimburse the states for transportation and
                                                                  other work costs incurred by participants. In fiscal year 2002, federal outlays for transportation were
                                                                  $18,523,535.
                                                                  d
                                                                   A program official said that 10 percent of total program outlays would be a conservative estimate of
                                                                  transportation outlays.
                                                                  e
                                                                   Grantees report total expenditures and unliquidated obligations made by the state Vocational
                                                                  Rehabilitation (VR) Agency for transportation services provided to individuals served under the State
                                                                  VR Services Program for a fiscal year. Total obligations include both federal and nonfederal funds
                                                                  under the State VR Services Program, the supplemental federal funds awarded to the State VR
                                                                  Agency for the cost of supported employment services under the Supported Employment Program,
                                                                  and funds from other rehabilitation sources. The Department of Education does not collect data on
                                                                  the specific sources of funds used for transportation obligations under the program. However, based
                                                                  on information available from total annual obligations on a national aggregate basis, a program official
                                                                  estimated that of the total amount reported for transportation, about 96 percent would be from the
                                                                  State VR Services Program, and of that amount approximately 76 percent would be federal funds.
                                                                  Similar estimates could not be made for the Supported Employment Program.
                                                                  f
                                                                   A program official said that, while transportation is an allowable use of funds, using funds for
                                                                  transportation is not encouraged. Program officials estimate that transportation expenditures are zero
                                                                  or close to zero for this program.
                                                                  g
                                                                   Fiscal year 2001 data are not available because transportation was not an area of emphasis until
                                                                  fiscal year 2002. The preliminary fiscal year 2002 outlays for transportation projects totaled
                                                                  $1,084,798.
                                                                  h
                                                                      A program official estimated that transportation outlays were 8.3 percent of total outlays.



                                                                  Page 52                                                               GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
Providing Transportation Services to the
Transportation-Disadvantaged




i
This is a partial outlay based on voluntary reporting by grantees. Full outlays are not available
because, according to a program official, grantees were not required to report transportation outlays
prior to fiscal year 2002. Fiscal year 2002 data are incomplete, however preliminary data on
transportation outlays from 46 of the 51 grantees totaled $2,215,498.
j
This is a partial outlay based on the amount grantees reported as non-assistance outlays in a
category exclusively for transportation. States reported an additional $356.5 million as outlays on
assistance in a category that includes transportation and supportive services, however program
officials were unable to determine what percentage of the outlays on assistance were spent on
transportation.
k
Program officials indicate that federal data on nonemergency medical transportation are not
available. Estimate assumes that transportation outlays are 0.73 percent of total program outlays,
based on previous research, including a survey of state Medicaid programs.
l
According to a program official, grantees report total outlays for transportation and it is not possible to
distinguish between federal and nonfederal funds. The official said 22 percent of total transportation
outlays would be a good estimate of the federal portion of fiscal year 2001 transportation outlays.
m
 Estimate of transportation outlays is based on data from grantee’s budget allocations, as suggested
by an agency official.
n
This is a partial outlay for transportation through the Community Development Block Grant program.
This figure includes transportation outlays for the Entitlement program, but excludes the State
Administered program.
o
 This is a partial estimate because, according to a program official, data on transportation outlays are
not available from all grantees. The program official could not provide an estimate of outlays for
transportation for all grantees.
p
 HUD provided data for transportation spending by 3,187 grantees in fiscal year 2001 that totaled
$7,221,569. According to HUD program officials, there are a total of 6,323 grantees, about twice as
many as reported data. The officials therefore estimated that about $14,000,000 would have been
spent on transportation from all grantees in fiscal year 2001.
q
 Estimate of outlays for transportation is based on a program official’s review of the budgets from 15
grantees who renewed their grants in fiscal year 2001. The official projected total transportation
outlays for the program based on these 15 grantees.
r
Public Law 102-477 is applied to allow tribal governments to consolidate funding from several federal
programs. These include: the Department of Health and Human Services’s Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families, and Child Care and Development Fund programs; the Department of Labor’s Native
American Employment and Training, and Welfare-to-Work Grants for Federally Recognized Tribes
programs; and the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Employment Assistance, Indian Social Service and
Welfare Assistance, Adult Basic Education, and Higher Education programs. The Indian Social
Services and Welfare Assistance Program is not used for transportation outside 102-477. The Adult
Basic Education and Higher Education programs do not target transportation-disadvantaged
populations as defined in this study outside of 102-477. The Employment Assistance program and the
HHS and DOL programs provide transportation assistance separately from 102-477.
s
A program official estimated that transportation outlays were approximately 1 percent of total
program outlays.
t
Program funding from fiscal year 1998 and 1999 may still be spent, but the program no longer
receives funding.
u
    Estimate of transportation outlays is based on a program official’s review of grantee obligations.
v
 According to a program official, fiscal year 2001 data are not available due to changes in the
program’s reporting system. The official reported that transportation outlays for fiscal year 2002
totaled $478,408.




Page 53                                                   GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Appendix II: Inventory of Federal Programs
Providing Transportation Services to the
Transportation-Disadvantaged




w
  According to a program official, there are three distinct allocations of funds under the Capital
Investment Grants: the New Starts allocation, which funds new rail projects; the fixed-guideway
modernization allocation, which provides funding to maintain and update aging rail systems; and the
bus allocation, which provides funding for the purchase of buses, bus-related equipment and
paratransit vehicles, and for the construction of bus-related facilities. Because the Capital Investment
Grants fund projects that provide services for the general public, the transportation-disadvantaged
likely benefit from many projects funded through each of the three allocations, but information was not
available to estimate what portion of these funds for the general public benefit the transportation-
disadvantaged. However, the program official said that the bus allocation would likely provide the
most direct benefit for the transportation-disadvantaged and the obligation level could be estimated
by totaling allocations to purchase vans, buses for the elderly or disabled, or paratransit vehicles and
equipment.
x
 The Nonurbanized Area Formula Program funds projects that provide services for the general public,
however grantees can use up to 10 percent of their funds to provide complementary ADA paratransit
services. Although grantees did not report obligations for complementary ADA paratransit, a program
official said that transportation-disadvantaged populations might benefit from other services provided
through this grant, such as demand-responsive services. However, the program official could not
identify the amount of spending that directly benefits the transportation-disadvantaged.
y
 According to a program official, the Urbanized Area Formula Program funds projects that provide
services for the general public, however grantees can use up to 10 percent of their funds to provide
complementary ADA paratransit services. The figure listed in the table is the total obligations that
grantees reported for providing complementary ADA paratransit services. Although grantees may
benefit from other services provided through this grant, such as demand-responsive services, the
amount spent on complementary ADA paratransit is the only portion that program officials could
identify as directly benefiting the transportation-disadvantaged.




Page 54                                                GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                              Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination
Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination  Efforts



Efforts

                                              Federal and state efforts to coordinate the services for the transportation-
                                              disadvantaged provided through their programs vary widely. This
                                              appendix offers some examples of those efforts.


                                              In 1999, we reviewed the coordination efforts of the Coordinating Council
Federal Coordination                          on Access and Mobility, a body of representatives from the U.S.
                                              Department of Transportation (DOT) and the U.S. Department of Health
                                              and Human Services (HHS).1 We made several recommendations for
                                              improving coordination between these two agencies. Table 5 shows the
                                              recommendations and actions taken in response.

Table 5: Federal Actions Taken in Response to GAO Recommendations for Improving Coordination

Recommendations from 1999 GAO               Specific actions completed or products
report                                      issued in response                                Actions in progress and further concerns
The DOT/ HHS Coordinating Council           In August 2000, the Coordinating Council          The plan has not been updated or distributed
on Access and Mobility should adopt a       adopted a prioritized strategic plan for fiscal   widely because the Council is now focused
prioritized strategic plan.                 years 2000 to 2004 and distributed the plan       on a more “product-oriented” approach. The
                                            to its members.                                   plan will be updated at the end of 2003.
                                                                                              The entire Coordinating Council has not met
                                                                                              formally since December 2000, but specific
                                                                                              workgroups have been developing action
                                                                                              agendas and interagency agreements.
The Coordinating Council should             The Council developed and issued an               Other actions were not completed by the
develop an action plan with specific        action plan in fiscal year 2003 and a             expected date, such as the preparation of a
responsibilities.                           number of actions have been completed,            promotional brochure on state Medicaid
                                            such as producing a series of “how to”            brokerage initiatives. Also, the outcome of
                                            publications on using intelligent                 actions is unknown due to the lack of an
                                            transportation systems to assist in the           annual report.
                                            coordination of HHS programs with local
                                            transit agencies.
The Coordinating Council should issue       No annual report has yet been issued.             The Council plans to issue its first annual
an annual report on its major initiatives                                                     report in June 2003.
and accomplishments to the
Secretaries of DOT and HHS.




                                              1
                                              U.S. General Accounting Office, Transportation Coordination: Benefits and Barriers
                                              Exist, and Planning Efforts Progress Slowly, GAO/RCED-00-1 (Oct. 22, 1999).




                                              Page 55                                             GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                                Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination
                                                Efforts




 Recommendations from 1999 GAO                Specific actions completed or products
 report                                       issued in response                              Actions in progress and further concerns
 DOT and HHS should ensure that               The document “Planning Guidelines for           Distribution to health and human service
 planned coordination efforts reinforce       Coordinated State and Local Specialized         providers may not have been as thorough.
 one another.                                 Transportation Services” was issued by the      According to some regional FTA and HHS
                                              Council in December 2000 and distributed        officials we interviewed, the guidelines might
                                              to state and local transit agencies. The        have more impact if they are delivered to
                                              guidelines are also available on the Web        human service agencies and providers. Other
                                              sites of the Council and DOT’s Federal          officials mentioned the need for more specific
                                              Transit Administration (FTA). These             guidance, such as models for cost sharing.
                                              guidelines provide information to facilitate
                                              the coordination of transportation services
                                              for 12 HHS and 10 DOT programs.
 DOT and HHS should direct their              The Council’s strategic plan provides for       All 10 of the regions produced action plans,
 regional working groups to assess            regional coordination action plans, including   but most have not been updated since fiscal
 obstacles to transportation                  the identification and assessment of            year 2000. In addition, the outcomes of
 coordination.                                obstacles to transportation coordination.       actions are not routinely tracked.
                                                                                              The FTA and HHS regional offices are jointly
                                                                                              sponsoring conferences in spring 2003 for
                                                                                              state transportation and human service
                                                                                              officials to, among other things, identify
                                                                                              obstacles to coordination and best practices
                                                                                              in successfully overcoming them.
 The Coordinating Council should              The Council’s official Web site was             The Coordinating Council’s Web site is not
 strengthen its Web site and make             discontinued due to lack of funding, but        yet linked to HHS’s Web site.
 information available on obstacles to        another site was established in May 2002,       The Council’s Web site does not contain an
 coordination and strategies to               operated by FTA in conjunction with the         explicit list of obstacles to coordination or
 overcome them.                               Community Transportation Association of         strategies to overcome them, but it does
                                              America. The site is linked to FTA’s Web        contain links to several reports that address
                                              site. (www.fta.gov/CCAM/www.index.html)         these issues.
Source: GAO.

                                                As a result of items in the Coordinating Council’s strategic plan and action
                                                plan, FTA and HHS have undertaken multiple efforts to coordinate
                                                transportation services provided through their programs. Other federal
                                                agencies are also involved in coordination activities. Examples of federal
                                                coordination efforts include the following:

                                          •     The FTA and HHS’s Administration on Aging have entered into a
                                                memorandum of understanding to increase coordination of transportation
                                                for older adults. For example, the agreement says that FTA and the
                                                Administration on Aging will work together to better coordinate the
                                                provision of funding opportunities to the aging services and transportation
                                                networks for the purpose of fostering coordination of transportation
                                                services and developing innovative service delivery models.

                                          •     FTA and HHS’s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services are developing
                                                an action plan between them to address the coordination of Medicaid
                                                funded transportation.




                                                Page 56                                           GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
    Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination
    Efforts




•   Department of Labor (DOL) and DOT officials are developing guidelines
    about using Workforce Investment Act2 funds for programs funded under
    DOT’s Job Access and Reverse Commute Program.

•   Some federal regional offices have interagency working groups to discuss
    transportation and other areas of mutual concern. Four of the 10 regions
    have formal working groups that meet regularly to discuss ways to use
    federal funds more efficiently, including for transportation services. These
    groups include officials from FTA, HHS and, in some regions, the
    Departments of Labor, Education, Housing and Urban Development,
    Veterans Affairs, and others. In 4 other regions, FTA and some
    components of HHS work together informally. One of the regions also has
    a formal working group that meets quarterly to discuss Workforce
    Investment Act programs.

•   A study undertaken on behalf of DOT and HHS examined seven specific
    planning strategies that can be used as part of a flexible regional planning
    process for coordinating transportation services of health and human
    service and transit agencies. The report is available on the Coordinating
    Council’s Web site.3

•   The Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) is an
    organization consisting primarily of rural and small community
    transportation providers, and it serves the dual role of transportation
    industry representative and mobility advocate. It also has responsibility for
    updating and maintaining the Coordinating Council’s Web site. CTAA
    sponsored a National Summit on Coordination in May 2003 to encourage
    federal, state, and local coordination. The participants—who came from
    federal departments, human service agencies, state associations, and
    transit providers—discussed, among other things, obstacles to
    coordination and strategies for addressing them.

•   CTAA established a Web site for the National Transit Resource Center, an
    information clearinghouse funded by DOT and HHS.4 The site contains
    links to the Coordinating Council as well as to the Community
    Transportation Assistance Project (CTAP) and the Rural Transit



    2
    P.L. 105-220.
    3
    Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Innovative State and Local Planning for
    Coordinated Transportation, (U.S. Department of Transportation, February 2002).
    4
    http://www.ctaa.org/ntrc.




    Page 57                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
    Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination
    Efforts




    Assistance Program (RTAP). CTAP, funded by HHS, provides information
    about transportation issues, such as accessibility, coordination, funding
    opportunities, training, management, and legislation and regulations.
    CTAP also compiled a comprehensive list of federal funding resources for
    community transportation providers. The purpose of RTAP, funded by
    FTA, is to provide training and technical assistance for rural public
    transportation operators, improve professionalism and safety of rural
    public transit services, promote efficiency and effectiveness of rural
    transit services, and support coordination with human service
    transportation.

•   HHS and CTAA have developed and distributed an Employment
    Transportation Toolkit designed to help communities improve access to
    transportation for employment purposes.

•   DOL is working with CTAA and DOT to implement several rounds of pilot
    projects testing various transportation strategies in support of local one-
    stop employment and training centers.5 According to DOL officials, these
    strategies can include referral services, transportation information,
    transportation services coordination, mobility management, and other
    transportation strategies.

•   DOL also provides funding to CTAA to convene regional workshops
    among workforce development, human services, transportation, and
    business communities, and to update a technical assistance toolkit for
    employment transportation. The toolkit includes promising practices from
    the state and local levels, as well as information on how businesses can be
    employment transportation partners.

•   According to agency officials, DOL’s Employment and Training
    Administration sponsored a “Promising Practices” project that includes
    transportation coordination efforts.

•   The National Consortium on the Coordination of Human Services
    Transportation—an initiative of FTA and HHS, under the direction of
    CTAA—plans to design and conduct a survey of state Medicaid directors
    to compile data on the Medicaid transit pass program, brokerages, and
    other transportation funding mechanisms within Medicaid; develop a new


    5
     In an effort to coordinate service delivery for employment and training programs, the
    Workforce Investment Act established one-stop centers in all states. Individuals seeking
    employment opportunities and training can receive services from more than a dozen
    federal programs that are required to offer their services through these one-stop centers.




    Page 58                                          GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
    Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination
    Efforts




    brochure outlining the benefits of the Medicaid pass program; develop
    case studies of successful brokerage programs and design a brochure
    describing them; identify promising practices and obstacles in human
    service transportation coordination and develop strategies for addressing
    these obstacles; and provide outreach on coordination efforts and
    resources.6

•   The federally-funded Transportation Research Board, an arm of the
    National Academy of Sciences, has several completed and ongoing
    projects on transportation coordination, including the following:

    •   In June 2000 the board issued “Welfare-to-Work: Integration and
        Coordination of Transportation and Social Services.” This report
        identifies obstacles former welfare recipients face in making the
        transition to work and suggests practical strategies to improve access
        to job opportunities.

    •   A draft report of TCRP Project B-24, “Toolkit for Rural Community
        Coordinated Transportation Services,” is expected in June 2003. The
        objective of this research is to develop a practical toolkit for use by
        local communities, state agencies, and tribal governments in planning
        and implementing coordinated community transportation services in
        rural areas.

    •   The final report of TCRP Project H-26, “Economic Benefits of
        Coordinating Human Service Transportation and Transit Services,” is
        expected in late 2003. The executive summary has been made available
        for distribution. In this project, the researchers are examining the
        economic benefits associated with various strategies and practices for
        coordinating health and human services and transit providers, as well
        as additional benefits (beyond costs) that might be obtained through
        further coordination efforts.

    •   TCRP Project H-30, “Strategies to Increase Coordination of
        Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged,” has an


    6
     To date, the consortium consists of the AARP, Amalgamated Transit Union, American
    Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, American Public Transportation
    Association, American Public Human Services Association, American Public Works
    Association, American Red Cross, Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations,
    Children’s Health Fund, Community Transportation Association of America, Easter Seals
    Project Action, National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, National Conference of
    State Legislatures, National Governor’s Association, and the Taxicab, Limousine, and
    Paratransit Association.




    Page 59                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                                            Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination
                                            Efforts




                                               expected completion date of January 2004. The objective of this
                                               research project is to develop strategies for initiating or improving
                                               coordination of local and regional publicly funded transportation
                                               services for the transportation-disadvantaged.


                                            Coordination of transportation services at the state level varies. We visited
State Coordination                          two states with formal coordinating bodies, one state with a formal
                                            arrangement between two agencies, and two states with no formal
                                            coordination. Table 6 identifies the states’ coordination arrangements and
                                            the agencies involved in formal coordination efforts.

Table 6: Examples of State Coordination of Services for the Transportation-Disadvantaged

                                            Statewide                Departments/ organizations involved in formal
 State             Type of coordination     coordinating body        coordination
 Arizona           None                     None                     None
 Florida           State-administered       Commission for the       • Departments of Transportation, Education, Veterans Affairs,
                   brokerage system         Transportation             Children and Families, Elder Affairs, Labor and Employment
                                            Disadvantaged              Security
                                                                     • Agency for Health Care Administration
                                                                     • Florida Transit Association
                                                                     • Community Transportation Coordinators
                                                                     • Transportation operators
                                                                     • Nontransportation business community
                                                                     • Florida Association for Community Action
                                                                     • Early Childhood Council
                                                                     • Representatives for the disabled, elderly, rural, and urban
                                                                       populations
 New York          None                     None                     None
 South Dakota      Statewide planning       Transportation           • Departments of Transportation, Human Services, Social
                   body                     Planning and               Services, Labor, and Health
                                            Coordinating Task        • Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities
                                            Force
 Wisconsin         None for entire state    None                     •   Departments of Transportation and Workforce Development
                                                                         jointly administer Wisconsin Employment Transportation
                                                                         Assistance Program (WETAP)
Source: GAO.

                                        •   Arizona does not have formal transportation coordination efforts at the
                                            state level, though some state agencies work together informally, and
                                            some localities have similar arrangements. For example, an official from
                                            the Jobs Administration in the Department of Economic Security said that
                                            the Administration works with the Department of Transportation to try to
                                            avoid duplication of services in rural areas.

                                        •   Florida has a state coordinating body that oversees local coordination
                                            efforts among most programs. This body is called the Commission for the
                                            Transportation-Disadvantaged and was created in 1989 by the Florida


                                            Page 60                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
    Appendix III: Federal and State Coordination
    Efforts




    Legislature to oversee the implementation of coordinated transportation
    disadvantaged services. The commission appoints local Community
    Transportation Coordinators who are responsible for the arrangement or
    delivery of transportation services for transportation-disadvantaged
    persons, either by brokering services or by providing transportation
    directly. Agencies are required to purchase transportation through the
    coordinated system, unless the services offered do not meet the needs of
    the client or the agency can find a lower cost alternative that meets the
    same safety standards.

•   New York does not have a formal coordinating body, but some state
    agencies work together informally and many local agencies have entered
    into brokerage agreements. Officials from the Departments of Labor and
    Transportation say they have been working together to identify needs and
    initiate transportation projects for employment programs. In addition, five
    state agencies review and comment on applications for FTA’s Transit
    Capital Assistance Program for Elderly Persons and Persons with
    Disabilities.

•   South Dakota has a state coordination task force that provides guidance to
    local coordination efforts, but not all localities or programs have
    developed coordinated systems. South Dakota established its
    Transportation Planning and Coordinating Task Force in 1998 at the
    initiative of the governor’s office. Additionally, the Departments of Human
    Services and Transportation require all of their programs or applicants to
    coordinate with other resources in the community.

•   Wisconsin does not have a single body in state government that
    coordinates all of Wisconsin’s services for the transportation-
    disadvantaged, but some state and local programs do coordinate. The state
    Departments of Transportation and Workforce Development jointly
    administer the Wisconsin Employment Transportation Assistance Program
    (WETAP), which uses a combination of federal, state, and local funds to
    provide transportation for low-income residents to get to jobs and
    employment services. WETAP applicants are required to demonstrate
    coordination, and only one grant application is accepted per county. Other
    agencies are also working to improve coordination. The Departments of
    Transportation and Health and Family Services are trying to coordinate
    Medicaid transportation. In addition, the Department of Health and Family
    Services convened a conference in August 2002 to discuss ways to
    improve coordination of transportation for people with disabilities.




    Page 61                                        GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
              Appendix IV: Informational Resources on
Appendix IV: Informational Resources on
              Coordination



Coordination

              Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility,
Web Sites     www.fta.dot.gov/CCAM/www.index.html

              Community Transportation Association of America, www.ctaa.org

              Workforce Investment Act Transportation Resources,
              www.doleta.gov/usworkforce/resources/transport.asp


              Community Transportation Association of America. 2002. Building
Reports       Mobility Partnerships: Opportunities for Federal Investment.
              Washington, D.C.: Community Transportation Association of America.

              Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility. 2000. Planning Guidelines
              for State and Local Coordination. Washington, D.C.: Coordinating Council
              on Access and Mobility.

              Creative Action, Inc. 2001. Coordinating Transportation Services: Local
              Collaboration and Decision-Making. Prepared for Project Action. Akron,
              OH: Creative Action, Inc.

              National Governor’s Association. 2002. Improving Public Transportation
              Services through Effective Statewide Coordination. Washington, D.C.:
              U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of
              Transportation.

              Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2002. Innovative State and
              Local Planning for Coordinated Transportation. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
              Department of Transportation.

              Westat. Economic Benefits of Coordinating Human Service
              Transportation and Transit Services. Transit Cooperative Research
              Project of the Transportation Research Board. Forthcoming.

              Westat. Toolkit for Rural Community Coordinated Transportation
              Services. Transit Cooperative Research Project of the Transportation
              Research Board. Forthcoming.

              National Transportation Consortium of States, Ecosometrics, Inc., and the
              American Public Works Association for the Coordinating Council on
              Access and Mobility. 2000. Working Together: A Directory of State
              Coordination Programs, Policies, and Contacts: 1999-2000. Washington,
              D.C.


              Page 62                                   GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                            Appendix V: Comments from the Department
Appendix V: Comments from the Department
                            of Health and Human Services



of Health and Human Services

Note: GAO comments
supplementing those in
the report text appear at
the end of this appendix.




                            Page 63                                    GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
              Appendix V: Comments from the Department
              of Health and Human Services




See page 7.




              Page 64                                    GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                 Appendix V: Comments from the Department
                 of Health and Human Services




See comment 1.




See comment 2.




                 Page 65                                    GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                          Appendix V: Comments from the
                          Department of Health and
                          Human Services




               The following are GAO’s comments on HHS’s letter dated May 30, 2003.


               1. HHS suggested that we consider incorporating other estimates of
GAO Comments      transportation spending by health and human service programs,
                  particularly one estimate that assumed transportation spending
                  accounted for 5 percent of total program spending. In developing our
                  estimate of transportation spending, we only included actual or
                  estimated figures for which the agencies could provide supporting
                  evidence. For those programs that had actual or estimated spending
                  information, on average, about 3 percent of total spending for those
                  programs was devoted to transportation. We do not know whether this
                  3 percent is an appropriate estimate of transportation spending for
                  other programs because grantees are generally not required to report
                  transportation spending information to the federal agency
                  administering the program. Furthermore, several officials who
                  administer programs that had no spending data told us that
                  transportation services probably represented less than 1 percent of
                  their total program spending.

               2. HHS proposed that we identify the levels, sectors, and affiliations of
                  officials and others we interviewed. In all agencies and locations we
                  talked with key human service and transportation officials responsible
                  for the delivery and coordination of human and transportation
                  services. We interviewed more than 100 officials in numerous federal,
                  state, and local transportation and human service agencies as well as
                  individuals representing service providers, consumers, and
                  professional and industry advocacy organizations. In our scope and
                  methodology section (see app. I), we generally describe the
                  responsibilities and affiliations of those we interviewed.




               Page 66                                    GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
             Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
Appendix VI: Comments from the
             of Education



Department of Education




             Page 67                                     GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
of Education




Page 68                                     GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                             Appendix VII: GAO Contacts
Appendix VII: GAO Contacts and Staff
                             and Staff Acknowledgments



Acknowledgments

                  Katherine Siggerud (202) 512-2834 or siggerudk@gao.gov
GAO Contacts      Rita A. Grieco (202) 512-2834 or griecor@gao.gov
                  Randall Williamson (206) 287-4860 or williamsonr@gao.gov


                  In addition to the individuals above, Christine Bonham, Bradley Hunt, Bert
Staff             Japikse, Jessica Lucas-Judy, Sara Ann Moessbauer, Hilary Murrish, Ryan
Acknowledgments   Petitte, Stanley Stenersen, and Andrew Von Ah made key contributions to
                  this report.




(542009)
                  Page 69                                 GAO-03-697 Transportation Coordination
                         The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of
GAO’s Mission            Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities
                         and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal
                         government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds;
                         evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
                         recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed
                         oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government
                         is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.


                         The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is
Obtaining Copies of      through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full-
GAO Reports and          text files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older
                         products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents
Testimony                using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,
                         including charts and other graphics.
                         Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
                         correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site
                         daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail
                         this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily
                         E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading.


Order by Mail or Phone   The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A
                         check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents.
                         GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a
                         single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:
                         U.S. General Accounting Office
                         441 G Street NW, Room LM
                         Washington, D.C. 20548
                         To order by Phone:     Voice:    (202) 512-6000
                                                TDD:      (202) 512-2537
                                                Fax:      (202) 512-6061


                         Contact:
To Report Fraud,
                         Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
Waste, and Abuse in      E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Federal Programs         Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470


                         Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
Public Affairs           U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
                         Washington, D.C. 20548