National Academies Press: OpenBook

Federal Funding Flexibility: Use of Federal-Aid Highway Fund Transfers by State DOTs (2022)

Chapter: Appendix D - Case Study Interview Guide

« Previous: Appendix C - Summary of State Survey Responses
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Case Study Interview Guide." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Federal Funding Flexibility: Use of Federal-Aid Highway Fund Transfers by State DOTs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26696.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Case Study Interview Guide." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Federal Funding Flexibility: Use of Federal-Aid Highway Fund Transfers by State DOTs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26696.
×
Page 70

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

D-1   Case Study Interview Guide A P P E N D I X D The research team, with the input from the panel meeting on May 4, 2021, selected the following states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) for more in-depth case studies. State Case Studies • Kansas: low utilization of authority to transfer funds among Federal-Aid Highway Program (FAHP) categories; average utilization of authority to transfers funds to Federal Transit Administration (FTA); primary focus on highway. • Oregon: balanced focus on urban and rural transportation needs; a multimodal approach that emphasizes regional travel options and transit-oriented development; MPOs play a meaningful role in directing suballocated funds; provides significant state transportation funds through the Keep Oregon Moving program; implemented a vehicle miles traveled fee program. • Pennsylvania: zero transfer among FAHP categories between 2013 and 2020; regular transfers to FTA; takes a multimodal approach. • South Carolina: average utilization of authority to transfer funds among FAHP categories; low utilization of authority to transfer funds to FTA; primary focus on highway. • Utah: high utilization of authority to transfer among FAHP categories; average utilization of authority to transfer funds to FTA; multimodal approach; MPOs play a deliberate role in funding transfer decisions; state and local funding for transportation plays a significant role, including road-user charges. MPO Case Studies • Albany, New York (Capital District Transportation Committee): plays a significant role in all program category transfers. • Memphis, Tennessee (Memphis Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization): plays a limited role in funding transfer decisions. The case studies are intended to be conducted with the chief executive officer (CEO), chief financial officer (CFO), or key policy and practice leaders in the organization. The questions

D-2 Federal Funding Flexibility: Use of Federal-Aid Highway Fund Transfers by State DOTs interviews is tailored to the unique history of each case study, a sample of questions for the case studies and workshops includes: • Questions about transfers among highway program categories. — Why are transfers among highway program categories used or not used? — What are the policy objectives driving the transfers? — What role do lapses and rescissions play? — How significant are FHWA performance criteria in the transfer experience? — What are the potential impacts, if any, of federal match requirements on transfers? — How significant is the role of project cost increases related to transfers? — Do funding needs for off-system bridges impact transfers? Does your state have any constraints, in addition to federal statutory constraints, on transfers out of the off-system bridge? Does your state have exceptions from FHWA to transfer funds out of off-system bridge? — Why is the transfer out of TA so high? — Why does your state not transfer funds out of the National Highway Freight Program? • Questions about transfers of highway funding to FTA for transit projects. — Why are transfers of highway funding to FTA for transit projects used or not used? — What are specific project examples of the uses of FAHP funds that are transferred to FTA? — What are the policy objectives driving the transfers? — How do states and MPOs decide whether to expend FHWA funds for transit or to transfer FHWA funds to FTA? — How significant are FHWA performance criteria in the transfer experience? — How significant is the role of project cost increases related to transfers? • Questions about state’s interactions with MPOs and municipalities. — How does the availability of state/local funding play in the transfer experience? For example, in states with restrictions on how state transportation funds are spent, are more — Does your state suballocate federal highway funds (e.g., STBG funds) as required by FHWA or above the FHWA required amount? Why or why not? How does suballocation of federal highway funds relate to transfer decisions? — Does your state swap federal funds with state/local funds? Why or why not? federal funds transferred? In states with a high proportion of state and local funds for transportation, are federal funds transferred at a higher or lower rate than in states with no local transportation funding? focus on understanding why transfer practices differ across the country. While each of the

Next: Appendix E - Case Study Summary »
Federal Funding Flexibility: Use of Federal-Aid Highway Fund Transfers by State DOTs Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The Federal-Aid Highway Program (FAHP) represents one of the largest grant programs in the federal domestic budget and is a combination of individual categorical and discretionary grant programs.

The TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program's NCHRP Research Report 1023: Federal Funding Flexibility: Use of Federal-Aid Highway Fund Transfers by State DOTs investigates recent experience with statutory features that allow recipients of formula grants to shift the authority to use federal funds from one FAHP category to another, and even into other modes.

Supplemental to the report are a related webinar video, slides from the webinar, and notes from the webinar.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!