Enhancing Transparency in Federal Transportation Grants: The Need for Comprehensive Documentation
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) report titled Transportation Grants: Implementation of Recommendations to Improve Documentation Would Enhance Program for Large, Complex Projects critically examines the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) oversight of the National Infrastructure Project Assistance (Mega) discretionary grant program. Launched under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021, the Mega program is aimed at funding large-scale, complex transportation initiatives that are expected to generate substantial national or regional economic, mobility, and safety benefits. With $5 billion allocated for the program through fiscal year 2026, this initiative is a cornerstone in modernizing the nation’s infrastructure, covering projects like highways, bridges, and multimodal transportation systems.
In fiscal year 2022, the DOT received 259 applications totaling $28.3 billion in requested funding. Of these, 128 applications advanced for detailed consideration, representing a diverse array of projects from 39 states and Washington, D.C. Ultimately, nine projects were selected to receive a cumulative $1.2 billion in funding. These awards included major infrastructure efforts such as the Brent Spence Bridge in Kentucky and the Hudson Yards Concrete Casing in New York. The selection process involved multiple evaluation stages, culminating in the Secretary of Transportation’s final approval based on recommendations from a Senior Review Team (SRT).
GAO’s report praises the DOT for its adherence to statutory guidelines and its efforts to align the grant process with federal regulations. However, it identifies a significant shortfall in the documentation of key decision-making criteria. Specifically, while DOT’s internal guidance provides for a merit review process, the department did not fully articulate how certain projects were deemed “exemplary.” This designation, which qualifies projects for higher prioritization, lacked detailed justification in the official records. Without such transparency, stakeholders are left questioning the objectivity and consistency of the evaluations, which could undermine public trust and the perceived fairness of the Mega program.
The GAO report highlights that the designation of projects as “exemplary” was often justified in vague terms, noting only that these projects were “strong” in specific outcome areas such as economic impact or cost-effectiveness. There was no explicit documentation to show how these strengths distinguished the projects from other competitive applications. This omission stands in contrast to the recommendations outlined in the DOT’s Guide to Financial Assistance, which mandates comprehensive documentation to substantiate decision-making processes in grant awards.
This lack of detailed documentation is not an isolated issue. GAO has repeatedly called for improved transparency in DOT’s discretionary grant programs. Since 2016, several reports have pointed to similar shortcomings, including inadequate explanations of key decisions and inconsistencies in the evaluation process. In response, GAO has recommended a department-wide approach to ensure the systematic recording of evaluation criteria and decision rationales. While DOT has taken steps toward addressing some of these concerns, the implementation of comprehensive documentation practices remains incomplete.
The report underscores the critical importance of such documentation, not only for ensuring fairness and equity in grant distribution but also for bolstering the credibility of the federal government’s infrastructure investments. Transparent decision-making processes are essential for fostering public confidence, especially in programs like Mega that involve substantial public funds and have far-reaching impacts on national infrastructure.
GAO concludes that by fully adopting its prior recommendations, DOT could significantly enhance the transparency and accountability of its grant programs. Clear and detailed documentation would provide a robust framework for future audits and evaluations, ensuring that grant awards are consistently aligned with program objectives and federal priorities. As the DOT continues to manage billions of dollars in infrastructure funding, implementing these recommendations will be vital in optimizing the program’s effectiveness and maintaining public trust in the federal government’s stewardship of critical infrastructure projects.