Skip to content

Audit Finds U.S. DOT Transit Record-Keeping “Unreliable,” “Inaccurate”

The disjointed state of "New Starts," the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) program to fund new rail and bus lines, is well-known on Capitol Hill -- in fact, House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) recently quipped that it ought to be renamed "small starts, low starts, and no starts."

The disjointed state of “New Starts,” the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) program to fund new rail and bus lines, is well-known on Capitol Hill — in fact, House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) recently quipped that it ought to be renamed “small starts, low starts, and no starts.”

charlotterail.jpgThousands gathered to board the new light rail line in Charlotte, NC in 2007. Photo via Light Rail Now

With Oberstar’s six-year transportation re-write bill in limbo for the moment, however, there appears to be scant political urgency to fix the program. But a report released today by the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) could help change that picture.

It can take as long as 14 years for transit planners to secure a full-funding New Starts grant agreement (FFGA), the final stage required before starting construction. Yet when GAO auditors set out to break the process down by its stages (which are depicted in a comically complex chart after the jump) they found the FTA could only provide complete information for nine out of 40 New Starts projects approved since 1997.

“We were unable to obtain complete and reliable project milestone data from FTA,” GAO auditors wrote. An attempt to confirm records for a random sample of 10 New Starts projects found the information to be “unreliable and, in some cases, inaccurate.”

The GAO report then outlined the FTA’s explanation for its inconsistent data:

First, FTA told us that it does not have records on when a project begins alternatives analysis because this phase is conducted at the local level, generally without FTA involvement. Second, FTA told us that it does not record when a project sponsor submits an application for preliminary engineering, final design, and FFGA because project sponsors almost never submit complete applications.

The bureaucratic hurdles that transit planners must clear to win federal aid stand in stark contrast to road projects’ usually unobstructed path to approval. But without solid data to make the case for fixing New Starts, transit advocates’ already arduous political fight for fairer treatment is likely to get even harder.

The GAO report can be downloaded in full here.

d09784_0009.jpgSource: GAO

Streetsblog has migrated to a new comment system. New commenters can register directly in the comments section of any article. Returning commenters: your previous comments and display name have been preserved, but you'll need to reclaim your account by clicking "Forgot your password?" on the sign-in form, entering your email, and following the verification link to set a new password — this is required because passwords could not be carried over during the migration. For questions, contact tips@streetsblog.org.

More from Streetsblog New York City

ANALYSIS: MTA Example Case For Hochul’s Insurance Plan Does Not Hold Up To Scrutiny

April 14, 2026

Tuesday’s Headlines: Old Man Yells At Hochul Edition

April 14, 2026

Janno Lieber Op-Ed: Hochul’s Insurance Plan Is a Pro-Transit Plan

April 14, 2026

Mamdani Embraces 20-Year-Old Plan to Create A Car-Free Link Between Prospect Park And Grand Army Plaza

April 13, 2026

Rampant Placard Abuse is Mucking Up This Bike Lane in Downtown Brooklyn

April 13, 2026
See all posts