Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 2
rural federal program and (2) the local matching fund sit department of the state DOT in order to collect requirements for each non-federal public transporta- missing data and verify the accuracy of the assem- tion program administered by each state. bled data. The research team used the contact list provided in the Survey of State Funding for Public Transporta- RESEARCH APPROACH tion report. State public transit department websites The data collection for this survey was accom- were also a source for the contact list. plished in two steps. First, data from publicly avail- Once a key contact was identified, the table con- able sources over the internet was assembled. Second, taining the data assembled for that state from the inter- a survey of the 50 state DOTs and the District of net research was delivered electronically. A request Columbia DOT was conducted to validate the infor- was made to arrange for a telephone interview upon mation collected from the internet research and to receipt of survey results from most states. In the tele- collect missing information. Forty-five states and the phone interview, the researchers District of Columbia responded to the survey. Phone interviews were conducted to confirm every survey · Verified that all federal grant programs admin- response. istered by the state and the non-federal grant programs were included · Developed an understanding of the state's poli- Internet Research cies on administering the federal and non- This step involved assembling useful data from federal transit grants existing data sources. The research team reviewed · Verified that the federal, state and/or local current publications, including the latest final report matching requirements for each grant program on Survey of State Funding for Public Transporta- were reported correctly tion, state DOT's public transportation department websites, and the FTA website. Depending on the SURVEY RESULTS availability of data, the following information was assembled for each state: The data collected from the states are presented in two formats, provided as Appendixes A and B. · Federal grants administered by the states and In Appendix A, the results are summarized by federal/non-federal share requirements by eligi- state by grant program and by eligible expense type. ble project expense type There is one exhibit for each state that responded and, · State and local share of non-federal portion for within each state, the results are organized by state- state-administered federal grants administered federal transit grant program and then · State and local share for the state public trans- by state-administered non-federal grant programs. portation grant programs In Appendix B, the results of state-administered For each state, a separate table was prepared sum- federal transit grant programs are summarized marizing the research team's findings on the match- by grant program. Within each grant program, the ing requirements. Assembling data prior to survey results are documented by eligible expense type and administration helped to solicit targeted information by state. Appendix B allows for easy comparison of from the survey respondents so as to reduce the time the matching requirements across the states. required by the survey respondents to provide input. During the survey, the researchers observed Also, assembling the data prior to the survey ensured that some states distribute funds from the state- that the researchers collected information consistently administered non-federal grant programs to the local from all states. Appendix C provides the template entities, providing the local entities with the discre- used to assemble data from the internet research. tion to either use these funds as 100 percent state money (without requiring matching local funds) or use these funds to match federal transit grant pro- Survey of State DOTs grams. In such instances, the researchers assumed The data assembled from the internet research that the entire non-federal match was provided by the was not complete for many states. In this step, the locals. Also, the state-administered non-federal tran- research team contacted officials at the public tran- sit grant programs that only provide matching funds 2