Welfare Reform: GAO's Recent and Ongoing Work on DOT's Access to 
Jobs Program (17-AUG-01, GAO-01-996R).				 
								 
Without adequate transportation, welfare recipients face	 
significant barriers in moving from welfare to work.		 
Three-fourths of welfare recipients live in central cities or	 
rural areas, while two-thirds of new jobs are located in the	 
suburbs. For many of these new jobs, access to public		 
transportation facilities, such as buses or subways, is limited  
or nonexistent. To address this issue, the Department of	 
Transportation (DOT) implemented the Job Access and Reverse	 
Commute program. GAO's previous reviews of this program found	 
that although the program would help support the reform of the	 
welfare system by providing transportation resources to welfare  
recipients, DOT needed to improve several aspects of the program.
GAO made several recommendations to enhance DOT's evaluation of  
the program and to promote coordination with other agencies. GAO 
reported that in 1999 and 2000, DOT had implemented the 	 
recommendations and had taken steps to refine its grant selection
process. GAO plans to issue a report on the Job Access program in
December 2001, and, in 2002, GAO expects to report on grantees'  
experiences in implementing their Job Access projects.		 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-01-996R					        
    ACCNO:   A01623						        
  TITLE:     Welfare Reform: GAO's Recent and Ongoing Work on DOT's   
             Access to Jobs Program                                           
     DATE:   08/17/2001 
  SUBJECT:   Welfare recipients 				 
	     Program evaluation 				 
	     Interagency relations				 
	     Reporting requirements				 
	     Public assistance programs 			 
	     Appropriated funds 				 
	     Workfare						 
	     DOL Job Access and Reverse Commute 		 
	     Program						                                                                
	     Temporary Assistance for Needy Families		 
	     Program						 
								 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-01-996R
     
GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

August 17, 2001 The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes Chairman The Honorable Phil
Gramm Ranking Minority Member Committee on Banking, Housing,

and Urban Affairs United States Senate

The Honorable Don Young Chairman The Honorable James L. Oberstar Ranking
Democratic Member Committee on Transportation

and Infrastructure House of Representatives

Subject: Welfare Reform: GAO?s Recent and Ongoing Work on DOT?s Access to
Jobs Program

Without adequate transportation, welfare recipients face significant
barriers in moving from welfare to work. Three- fourths of welfare
recipients live in central cities or rural areas, while two- thirds of new
jobs are located in the suburbs. For many of these new jobs, access to
public transportation facilities, such as buses or subways, is limited or
nonexistent. Transportation to these jobs is primarily by car, yet many
welfare recipients do not have cars. To address this mismatch and as part of
the welfare reform movement, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA- 21) authorized up to $750 million for fiscal years 1999
through 2003 to implement the Job Access and Reverse Commute (Job Access)
program.

On June 8, 2001, we briefed staff of the Senate Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs and the House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure on (1) our prior work, (2) our preliminary observations on
the Department of Transportation?s (DOT) implementation of the program in
fiscal year 2001, and (3) our current plans for reporting on the program. We
agreed to send you this letter describing the information we provided during
the briefing.

United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

Page 2 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

The following summarizes the information we are providing.

* We previously reported on the Job Access program three times from May 1998
through December 2000. In May 1998 we found that the proposed Job Access
program would support reform of the nation?s welfare system by bringing
additional resources to transport welfare recipients to work. 1 We made
recommendations- reflected in TEA- 21- intended to (1) enhance DOT?s
evaluation of the program; and (2) promote coordination among DOT, other
federal agencies, prospective grantees, and other affected parties (such as
local social service agencies). In November 1999 2 and December 2000, 3 we
reported that DOT had implemented our recommendations and taken steps to
refine its grant selection process.

* Our preliminary observations related to (1) DOT?s proposal to use a
formula for allocating grant funds to states, (2) the status of grant fund
obligations, and (3) DOT?s plans for reporting on the program to the
Congress. First, DOT believed that allocating fiscal year 2002 Job Access
funding to states via formulas would promote predictable funding of Job
Access projects. The formula proposal was DOT?s response to fiscal years
2000 and 2001 conference reports accompanying DOT?s appropriations acts that
directed Job Access funding to specific projects. However, in commenting on
a draft of this letter, DOT said that because the Congress had rejected its
formula proposal, DOT was considering another option. Second, according to
DOT?s comments on a draft of this letter, as of August 7, 2001, DOT had
obligated 94 percent of the Job Access program's fiscal year 1999
appropriated funds, 67 percent of the program's fiscal year 2000
appropriated funds, and 20 percent of the program's fiscal year 2001
appropriated funds. Third, DOT missed its June 2000 statutory reporting
deadline but expects to send the report to the Congress in September 2001.

* Regarding our ongoing work, we plan to issue a report on the Job Access
program in December 2001, focusing on FTA?s implementation of the program.
In 2002, we expect to report on grantees' experiences in implementing their
Job Access projects.

Background

TEA- 21 authorized the Job Access program, through which DOT provides grants
to local agencies, nonprofit organizations, transit authorities, and others
to improve the mobility of welfare recipients and low- income individuals
seeking employment. Within DOT, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is

1 Welfare Reform: Transportation's Role in Moving from Welfare to Work (GAO/
RCED- 98- 161, May 29, 1998). 2 Welfare Reform: Implementing DOT?s Access to
Jobs Program in Its First Year (GAO/ RCED- 00-

14, Nov. 26, 1999). 3 Welfare Reform: DOT Is Making Progress in Implementing
the Job Access Program (GAO- 01-

133, Dec. 4, 2000).

Page 3 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

responsible for implementing the program. DOT?s two major goals for the
program are to (1) provide transportation services in urban, suburban, and
rural areas to assist welfare recipients and low- income individuals to gain
access to employment opportunities; and (2) increase collaboration among
such parties as transportation providers, human service agencies, employers,
metropolitan planning organizations, states, and communities in providing
access to employment.

To award Job Access grants in fiscal years 1999 and 2000, DOT issued
solicitations of applications in the Federal Register and, in response,
received and reviewed project proposals. It selected projects for the
program on the basis of four criteria:

(1) the degree of local coordination exhibited when a project was being
designed, (2) the demonstrated need of an area for Job Access services, (3)
a project?s effectiveness in providing those services, and (4) the ability
of an applicant to obtain resources to continue operating a project

after the Job Access grant ends. After DOT had announced the selected
proposals, the applicants were required to provide assurances and
documentation of compliance with FTA?s standard grant requirements, such as
those concerning drug and alcohol testing, federal procurement standards,
and state and regional transportation planning. TEA- 21 requires that the
Job Access grantees provide at least 50 percent matching funds from other
sources, including other federal funds available for transportation
services- for example, funds from the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families program.

TEA- 21 authorized up to $150 million each year for fiscal years 1999
through 2003 for the Job Access program. For fiscal year 1999- the program's
first year- the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act provided $75 million for the Job Access program, and DOT
announced competitive awards of about $71 million for 179 projects.

For fiscal year 2000, the Congress also provided $75 million for the
program. However, the conference report that accompanied DOT?s
appropriations act directed DOT?s distribution of $49.6 million of the $75
million to identified states, localities, and other organizations. In
addition, DOT solicited proposals and competitively awarded about $29.6
million, including $25.4 million provided by the Congress for fiscal year
2000 and about $4.2 million carried over from fiscal year 1999. For fiscal
year 2001, the Congress provided $100 million, and the conference report
directed the distribution of about $75 million to identified states,
localities, and other organizations. Like applicants for competitive grants,
organizations and localities identified in the conference report had to
provide

Page 4 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

project proposals that were consistent with the requirements of the program;
moreover, they had to submit additional documentation that complied with the
standard FTA grant requirements.

Prior Work on the Program

To date, we have issued three reports on the program: in May 1998, before
the program was established; in November 1999; and in December 2000.

* In May 1998, we reported that the proposed Job Access program would
support reform of the nation?s welfare system by, among other things,
providing additional resources to transport welfare recipients to work. 4 We
recommended that DOT (1) establish specific objectives, performance
criteria, and goals for measuring the program?s progress; (2) require
grantees to coordinate transportation strategies with local job placement
and other social service agencies; and (3) work with other federal agencies
to coordinate welfare- to- work activities. TEA- 21 reflected these
recommendations and required appropriate action by DOT.

* In November 1999, we reported on the implementation of the program in
fiscal year 1999- its first year. 5 We found that DOT had implemented our
second and third recommendations in carrying out TEA- 21. DOT had also taken
preliminary steps to implement our recommendation that it establish specific
objectives, performance criteria, and goals for measuring the program?s
progress. However, we also found that DOT?s process for selecting Job Access
grant proposals was not consistent in fiscal year 1999, and the basis for
some selections was unclear.

* Our December 2000 report examined DOT?s implementation of the program in
fiscal year 2000. 6 We found that DOT had taken steps to improve its process
for selecting Job Access proposals. For example, to promote greater
consistency in the evaluation and selection of grantees, DOT developed a
standard format for reviewing Job Access proposals and provided more
detailed guidance to its reviewers. Almost 90 percent of the fiscal year
1999 Job Access grantees that responded to a GAO survey were satisfied with
the goals and intent of the program. However, 51 percent said it took too
long to satisfy various standard FTA grant requirements- about 9 months, on
average. As a result, about one- third of the respondents reported
experiencing problems in obtaining matching funds. Also, seven projects were
withdrawn (about 4 percent of Job Access projects) for varied reasons,
including, in one case, the loss of matching funds. Also, DOT implemented
our recommendation that it develop specific objectives, performance
criteria, and measurable goals for the Job Access program by developing an
evaluation plan

4 GAO/ RCED- 98- 161. 5 GAO/ RCED- 00- 14. 6 GAO- 01- 133.

Page 5 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

and by requesting specific data from the grantees. DOT developed a goal to
increase new employment sites by 4,050 in fiscal year 2000 and 8,050 in
fiscal year 2001. 7

Preliminary Observations on the Job Access Program

Our preliminary observations on the Job Access program fall into three
areas- (1) DOT?s proposed funding process, (2) FTA?s obligation of grant
funds, and (3) DOT?s plan for evaluating the program.

First, regarding DOT?s funding process, according to DOT?s Internet Web
site, ?in fiscal year 2000 the Congress earmarked approximately 66 percent
of the funds for specific projects; in fiscal year 2001, about 75 percent.?
In DOT?s view, as a result of these funding designations, ?There were many
highly worthy applicants that were not designated for an earmark, and the
limited? funds remaining for national competition resulted in many of these
worthy applicants not being funded.? 8 In response, for fiscal year 2002,
DOT proposed to allocate funds to the states and the District of Columbia
via a formula rather than to individually selected projects. This proposal,
according to FTA, would have promoted more predictable funding that could
have been continuous over a period of several years for a Job Access
project. DOT also notes that by making funding available to the states
earlier than under the existing selection process and by enhancing the
certainty of funding, the formula proposal would have allowed funds to be
obligated earlier. At the national level, the formula would have allocated
60 percent of the funds to areas with populations exceeding 200,000 and 40
percent of the funds to smaller areas. The total funds allocated to states
would have considered the number of low- income residents.

In its comments on a draft of this letter, DOT states that the Congress did
not accept the formula proposal. DOT also states that it is considering an
option of soliciting proposals in the fiscal year prior to funding
availability and sharing its scoring of proposals with appropriations
committees in order to accelerate the timing of obligations. DOT adds that
it has provided applicants with ?pre- award authority,? making it possible
for applicants to initiate service prior to the final obligation of Job
Access funding.

Second, regarding DOT?s obligations of grant funds, as of August 7, 2001,
FTA had not obligated significant portions of the funds that had been
appropriated for Job Access grants since fiscal year 1999. Specifically:

7 An employment site is considered accessible if it is located within ï¿½ mile
of services provided by the grantee. 8 We do not address here FTA?s
assertion that the funding designations, which were contained in

the conference reports accompanying the DOT appropriations acts for fiscal
years 2000 and 2001, precluded it from awarding grants to worthy applicants.
In addition, we have not assessed the effects of these funding designations
on the implementation of the program.

Page 6 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

* For at least 7 of the 174 projects 9 selected for grants in fiscal year
1999, funds had not been obligated. Five of these projects were in the
Chicago, IL, area; one in the Dallas, TX, area; and one in Schoharrie
County, NY. The total value of the grants for these projects was about $2.7
million, and the grants ranged in dollars to be obligated from about
$119,000 to $1 million.

* The Congress provided about $75 million for projects in fiscal year 2000-
according to DOT, about 67 percent of this amount had been obligated.

* FTA had obligated about 20 percent of the $99.8 million appropriated for
Job Access program grants for fiscal year 2001. For fiscal year 2001
funding, rather than solicit applications for competitive grant awards for
the approximately $25 million that was not directed to specific
organizations in the conference report, FTA decided to grant these funds to
proposals submitted in fiscal year 2000 that it considered ?meritorious? but
was previously unable to fund.

DOT is waiting to solicit grant proposals for fiscal year 2002 until after a
decision is reached on its proposal to allocate funds via formula.

According to DOT officials and as explained in our December 2000 report,
DOT?s process for awarding grants is a two- track process, consisting of one
track for soliciting, evaluating, and selecting projects, and a second track
in which prospective grantees must satisfy standard FTA grant requirements.
This process results in grantees often receiving funds in the fiscal year
after the Congress provided them. However, Job Access funds remain available
from one fiscal year to the next for obligation.

Third, DOT has developed a plan for evaluating the program but has not yet
sent a progress report to the Congress. TEA- 21?s reporting deadline was
June 2000. DOT plans to send a report to the Congress by September 2001.

Our Ongoing Work on the Program

The objectives for our ongoing review of the Job Access program will focus
on FTA?s implementation of the program. We plan to issue a report in
December 2001 and publish a more extensive report in 2002 on the challenges
experienced by grantees in implementing their Job Access projects.

Agency Comments

We provided DOT with a draft of this letter for review and comment. The
department, through FTA?s Associate Administrator for Administration,
provided

9 The total number has grown to 194 because some organizations chose to have
their own grants rather than participate as subgrantees under consolidated
grants, and other proposals were consolidated.

Page 7 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

us with written comments, which are attached as enclosure II. We revised our
letter in response to those comments as appropriate.

DOT suggested that our letter should explain that the competitive selection
and obligation process is a two- step process that is initiated only after
the Congress appropriates funds under the program. According to DOT,
information about appropriations generally becomes available in the first
quarter of the fiscal year, at which time DOT begins to solicit proposals
for the program. DOT normally announces selections later in the fiscal year;
however, even after being selected, applicants are still required to address
standard FTA requirements. This dual track process, states DOT, would result
in obligations being incurred most frequently in the fiscal year after the
funding is made available. We agree that the two- track process results in
obligations occurring in the fiscal year after funding was made available
and incorporated this information into this letter.

DOT provided information about its proposal to allocate Job Access funds on
a formula basis. DOT states that although the formularization proposal would
have made funding available earlier than under the existing two- track
selection and obligation process, the Congress did not approve the proposal.
Instead, DOT is considering soliciting proposals in the fiscal year prior to
funding availability and then sharing its ranking of proposals with
congressional appropriations committees in hopes of allowing obligations to
be made in the same year as the appropriation. We revised our letter to
include this new information.

The Department also provided new information on the percent of funds it has
obligated for the Job Access program. For example, by June 1, 2001, DOT had
obligated 91 percent of the funds that were appropriated in fiscal year
1999; but by August 7, 2001, DOT had obligated 94 percent of those funds. We
revised our letter to include this new data.

- - - - We are sending copies of this letter to the cognizant congressional
committees; the Secretary of Transportation; the Administrator, Federal
Transit Administration; and other interested parties. The letter will also
be available on GAO?s home page at http:// www. gao. gov. If you have any
questions about this letter, please call me at (202) 512- 2834 or E- mail me
at heckerJ@ gao. gov.

JayEtta Z. Hecker Director, Physical

Infrastructure Issues

Enclosure I

Page 8 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs Slides Presented at June 8, 2001 Briefing

Briefing to Committee Staff: U. S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban

Affairs House Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure June 8, 2001

Review of Access to Jobs Program

Enclosure I

Page 9 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Contents * Background Prior GAO Work  Update on Program Implementation

 Proposal for Formula Funding  Project Funding Status - FY 1999 - FY 2001
 Program Evaluation Efforts

 Ongoing Review of Access to Jobs Program

Enclosure I

Page 10 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Background

TEA- 21 authorized the Job Access program.

DOT?s Federal Transit Administration (FTA) makes grants to local agencies,
nonprofits, transit authorities, and others to improve the mobility of
welfare recipients to the workplace.

In FY 1999, the Congress provided $75 million for the program, and DOT
competitively granted $71 million.

In FY 2000, the Congress provided $75 million, but directed the distribution
of about $49.6 million. DOT awarded about $29. 6 million, including about $4
million carried over from fiscal year 1999.

In FY 2001, the Congress provided $100 million, but directed the
distribution of about $75 million.

Enclosure I

Page 11 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Prior GAO Work

In May 1998, we reported that the proposed Job Access program would bring
additional resources to transport welfare recipients to work, and we made 3
recommendations for the implementation of the program. Specifically, DOT
should

1) establish objectives, criteria, and goals to evaluate the progress of the
program,

2) require grantees to coordinate transportation strategies with various job
placement and other social welfare agencies,

3) work with other federal agencies to coordinate welfare- to- work
activities.

Enclosure I

Page 12 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Prior GAO Work

In November 1999, we reported: FTA had implemented the 2nd and 3rd

recommendations of our May 1998 report. However, FTA?s grant selection
process was

inconsistent. Also, FTA had not begun to evaluate the program.

In December 2000, we reported: FTA had improved its grant selection
processes and

developed an evaluation plan. Most FY 1999 grantees were pleased with DOT?s
efforts

to help them meet standard FTA grant requirements, but half said it took too
long to satisfy them.

Enclosure I

Page 13 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Program Implementation PROPOSAL FOR FORMULA FUNDING DOT has proposed a
formula to allocate Job Access grant

funds in FY 2002.

The proposal considers population levels and numbers of low- income people.

Enclosure I

Page 14 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Program Implementation PROJECT FUNDING STATUS - FY 1999- 2001 At least 7 FY
1999 projects still unfunded: 5 in the

Chicago area, 1 in Texas, and 1 in New York.  Significant FY 2000 and FY
2001 funds not obligated:

$75 million provided for FY 2000, but only half obligated as of June 1,
2001.

Only 1% of FY 2001 funds obligated as of June 1, 2001.

DOT has not solicited FY 2002 grants pending the decision on its formula
distribution proposal.

 FY 2001 funds awarded to prior- year applicants: DOT granted $24.5 million
to previously unfunded or partially funded applications.

Enclosure I

Page 15 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Program Implementation PROGRAM EVALUATION EFFORTS

DOT did not send report in June 2000 to the Congress.

Most report relevant data are now more than a year old, and some data were
found to be inaccurate.

DOT plans to update the data and send a report to the Congress in September
2001.

13, 000 new employment sites are to be reached (DOT?s objective was to reach
4,000).

Enclosure I

Page 16 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

Ongoing Work

Met with Senate and House Committees to discuss our work in April and May
2001.

For a December 2001 report, we will examine how DOT is implementing the Job
Access program and how grantees are implementing their projects.

 For a 2002 report, we will send out an extensive questionnaire on project
implementation.

Enclosure II

Page 17 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs Comments From the Department of
Transportation

Enclosure II

Page 18 GAO 01- 996R Access to Jobs

(544005)
*** End of document. ***