Public transportation provides many groups with wide-ranging benefits. Those served include transportation disadvantaged populations, such as “low-income individuals”. Congress created the JARC program in the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) to support national welfare-reform goals, including helping adults meet new work requirements to receive federal assistance. A purpose of the program was to improve low-income individuals’ ability to access jobs and job- related needs by providing grants to states and localities for the provision of additional or expanded transportation services. Under TEA-21, JARC was a discretionary program, with projects selected by FTA for funding through a competitive process or congressionally designated for funding. Figure 1 provides a timeline of subsequent surface transportation authorizations that affected the program. In 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act —A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) changed JARC into a formula program. FTA apportioned dedicated program funds to states for projects in small urbanized and rural areas, and to large urbanized areas, based on a statutory formula. State transportation agencies were required to be JARC designated recipients for small urbanized and rural areas. Designated recipients for large urbanized areas include major transit agencies and metropolitan planning organizations. SAFETEA-LU also required that designated recipients develop and conduct a competitive selection process for their projects, and competitively allocate funds to subrecipients. After projects were selected, designated recipients had to apply to FTA to fund the projects. FTA awarded grants to designated recipients and funds were obligated at the time of award. Figure 2 below provides an overview of the JARC grants process under SAFETEA-LU. Program-eligible activities included, among others: late-night and weekend transit service, expansion of fixed-route public transit routes (e.g., bus routes), ride-sharing activities, local car loan programs, or capital expenditures such as vehicle purchases to support a transit service. In fiscal year 2012, the last year before the program was consolidated, FTA apportioned approximately $176.5 million to urbanized and rural areas. Funds were available for obligation for 3 years from the time of apportionment. JARC funds remain subject to the program requirements that were in place at the time the funds were apportioned. In 2012, the JARC program was one of several FTA grant programs that MAP-21 changed or did not renew. Specifically, the statute consolidated eligible JARC activities into the existing Urbanized Area Formula Program (urban transit program) and Formula Grants for Rural Areas Program (rural transit program). Eligible activities of the consolidated urban and rural transit programs are as follows. Urban transit program: In addition to providing funds for eligible JARC activities in urbanized areas, this program provides funds for activities including: (1) planning, certain operating costs, engineering, design, and evaluation of transit projects and other technical transportation-related studies; (2) capital investments in bus and bus- related activities; and (3) capital investments in new and existing fixed-guideway systems including, but not limited to, rolling stock, overhauling and rebuilding of vehicles, and communications. Rural transit program: In addition to providing funds for eligible JARC activities in rural areas, this program provides funds for activities including: (1) planning; (2) capital expenses for the acquisition of buses and vans or other paratransit vehicles; (3) preventive maintenance, vehicle rehabilitation, remanufacture, or overhaul; and (4) operating expenses directly related to system operations We have previously noted that consolidation was seen as a means of continuing the goals of the program while offering greater efficiency and flexibility, including decreasing administrative burdens, to recipients. FTA communicated changes that MAP-21 made to public transportation programs, including the JARC program, to designated recipients through program guidance and outreach. Initially, FTA issued a Federal Register notice regarding FTA transit program changes in October 2012. The notice provided interim guidance and emphasized that under MAP-21, activities that were funded through the former JARC program are eligible under the urban transit program and the rural transit program. The notice also stated that there is no set-aside or spending cap on JARC activities. After the 2012 consolidation, DOT applied all of the JARC eligibility requirements and existing activities in the urban transit program and rural transit program. For example, FTA officials explained that they incorporated a unique aspect of grantee eligibility under the JARC program—the eligibility of private nonprofit organizations as sub- recipients—in the urban transit program. FTA issued circulars with the final MAP-21 program guidance in 2014. The circulars reiterated that there is no limit to the amount of allocated and unobligated formula funds that can be used for JARC activities until Congress rescinds or redirects the funds to other programs, and outlined the eligibility requirements for these activities. As part of its outreach to funding recipients, FTA held webinars highlighting new and consolidated programs under MAP-21, and the JARC program was among the programs covered. Additionally, FTA officials stated that headquarters and regional FTA officials made themselves available through conferences, or other means such as telephone calls or e-mail, to answer questions or concerns regarding the consolidation and its potential impacts on JARC activities. Selected recipients we spoke with said they found out about changes to the JARC program through FTA webinars or designated JARC recipients. Of the 19 selected designated recipients we interviewed, a majority (12 of 19) said they found out about the JARC consolidation primarily through webinars and FTA’s summer 2012 conference. Some also reported they viewed their contact with FTA officials as a useful resource as they navigated the program changes. For example, an official with the Texas Department of Transportation said he found FTA staff to be the most important resource during program changes, because the staff was available for questions and feedback. Furthermore, this official told us that his agency had meetings twice a year with subrecipients, and FTA staff joined those meetings to assist in answering a range of questions or concerns, including those on JARC activities, from subrecipients. Of the 15 selected subrecipients we interviewed, about half (7) reported finding out about the JARC program changes through their state’s transportation agency or other designated recipient. For example, an official with a Mississippi subrecipient said it found out about the JARC consolidation and its implications at the annual workshop held by the Mississippi Department of Transportation to assist agencies with grant applications. In Arizona, an official with a selected subrecipient said he learned about the JARC program changes through its metropolitan planning organization’s committee meeting. Of the 34 total selected recipients we interviewed, 22 stated they found the guidance provided to them, either from FTA directly or through their respective designated recipients, to be sufficient and effective in communicating program changes. For example, an official from a designated recipient in Mississippi who characterized FTA’s communications as effective noted that the information was readily available, but that it was primarily up to recipients to read the guidance and follow up with FTA on any questions or concerns. An official from a selected subrecipient in Virginia said that the state’s communication regarding the MAP-21 program changes was good and that FTA’s written resources also provided useful details on the changes. Almost all (30 of 34) selected recipients reported that they have continued providing JARC activities, such as transportation services, that were started prior to the 2012 MAP-21 consolidation. About two-thirds (22) of the selected recipients we interviewed have maintained all such activities. Officials from half of the selected recipients (17) reported that they still are expending dedicated JARC program funds received prior to the 2012 statutory changes to support their ongoing JARC activities, and that they plan to continue using those funds until they are depleted. Further, all selected recipients reported that they have had to address, or anticipate having to address, service or funding challenges in order to continue their JARC activities. Despite reported challenges, all selected recipients except one reported they are working to maintain their JARC activities, including service hour expansions and commuter bus routes. Some selected recipients reported that it is too soon to tell whether they will need to make additional adjustments to their JARC activities in the future because of possible year-to-year funding challenges. Of the 34 selected recipients we interviewed, 30 had continued JARC activities, such as ongoing transit service, started prior to the MAP-21 changes. These selected recipients reported that they have maintained some level of JARC activities using a number of funding sources, including urban or rural transit program funds and remaining JARC program funds. Specifically, about two-thirds of selected recipients (22 of 34) reported continuing all of their previous JARC activities to date, and just under one-quarter (8 of 34) said they continue to provide downsized or redesigned JARC activities. The remaining 4 selected recipients had used their JARC program funds to complete short-term activities, such as capital expenditures for vehicles or pilot transit programs, which were not affected by the MAP-21 changes. Through analysis of our interviews with selected recipients, we identified a number of reasons recipients have been able to continue JARC activities after the MAP-21 program changes. These reasons include the following: Remaining dedicated JARC funds: Seventeen of the 34 recipients reported that they have not yet expended all of their dedicated funds and continue to use them to fund JARC activities. Officials from 5 selected recipients reported that when MAP-21 was implemented in 2012, they started planning their expenditure of remaining dedicated funds to sustain existing JARC activities into future years. For example, officials at Texas Department of Transportation, a selected designated recipient, reported redistributing dedicated funds that their subrecipients had not expended in a timely manner to other eligible subrecipients’ ongoing JARC activities.