Holding states and MPOs accountable for road safety

Everything in the federal transportation program has the word “safety” plastered all over it, but the program fails at nearly every turn to actually require safety improvements from those who are picking the projects and spending the money. Our roads will continue to be among the most dangerous in the entire developed world until Congress starts requiring agencies to set clear goals to improve safety on their roads and then holds them accountable for doing so.

T4’s policy proposal for prioritizing safety over speed

In our second principle for reauthorization, safety over speed, we outline the ways that states and MPOs should be held accountable for improving roadway safety: 

• Requiring states and MPOs to set targets to improve the safety of their roadways for all road users.
• Assisting states and MPOs that fail to meet their safety targets, by requiring a share of formula funds, as well as federal competitive awards, must be dedicated to safety projects. 

We need a system that requires measurable improvements on safety, and holds everyone accountable for producing results—with penalties for those that are failing to make progress on what should be the guiding principle of every dollar spent. Here’s how we do that.

1) Require states and metro areas to set targets to improve the safety of their roadways for all road users.

States and MPOs must continually move the needle on safety, which means aligning all of their goals, plans, and projects around reducing the number of deaths and serious injuries on their roads—for everyone who uses them. Step one is requiring that agencies set performance targets at levels that would actually improve the safety of their roadways for all road users. (Learn more about our current system of performance management here.) You might be surprised to learn that many DOTs, which receive billions to improve our transportation system—with a top priority of safety enshrined in the federal program—then set annual goals for their roads to get more dangerous. The targets are especially terrible when it comes to the safety of people walking, biking, or otherwise not in a vehicle: 10 states in total set targets for more people outside of vehicles to be injured/killed in 2024 compared to 2022.  

Congress should require states and MPOs to set targets that aim to decrease the number of deaths and serious injuries on our roadways for all road users. No one receiving historic amounts of federal transportation funding should be permitted to set “goals” for more people to be killed on their roadways. States and MPOs need to have the objective of killing fewer people every year; it’s the bare minimum the American people deserve.

2) Hold states and MPOs accountable for failing to improve safety with real financial penalties

It’s not enough to say you want to improve or set positive targets that you never reach. For example, Florida sets a comical target for zero deaths every year despite more than 3,000 people being killed each year—a number which has seen increases over the last ten years. 

Having targets without any incentives or penalties has led to our current performative system, where safety is only given lip service. We need to end the status quo where we shovel exponential amounts of money into an increasingly dangerous transportation system and call it progress. For states and MPOs that fail to meet these new safety targets, where improvements are required, there should be penalties that hold them accountable for improving safety.

Congress should require USDOT to dedicate a share of formula funds to safety projects for states and MPOs that fail to meet their goals. Formula funds, even those intended for safety projects, are flexible and are very often transferred around to other programs and purposes by states and MPOs. However, if they fail to meet their positive targets for improving safety, they should lose this privilege. Funds intended for safety should be prohibited from being transferred out of core safety programs, like the Highway Safety Improvement Program. If they are unable to improve safety, there is no reason why they should be able to take safety-specific money and spend it on non-safety projects. 

A second major change for these failing states or metro areas is that they would be required to spend a share of their apportionments of the National Highway Performance Program, the largest formula program intended for use on the National Highway System, and the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program on safety projects identified in their newly reformed planning documents for confirmed projects.

This change would mean less potential money for projects like congestion reduction or roadway expansion that increase danger for road users, and more in the bank for everyone’s top priority: safety. There are also rewards: States that are doing a good job on safety by meeting their targets and demonstrating consistent year-over-year improvements in safety for all road users would get rewarded with more of the flexibility they prize so much. 

Finally, failing states and MPOs would be restricted to competitive grants related to roadway transportation safety improvements. These failing states or metro areas would be ineligible to apply for certain programs unless their projects clearly demonstrate that they will improve safety as a main goal.  Failing states and MPOs could continue to apply for discretionary grants such as INFRA or MEGA, but the key proposed outcome of their application should be to improve safety for all road users. These grants are discretionary, and therefore, USDOT should not reward noncompliant states and MPOs with additional funding if they cannot achieve their goals around safety. 

Prioritize safety over speed

All the changes outlined in this series of posts on T4America’s top priority of prioritizing safety over speed are centered on creating a new feedback loop focused on producing better performance, transparency, and outcomes. We need more complete and current data on where and how people are being killed or injured so we can better understand the scope of the problem. All grantees in the federal program should be setting goals and targets to improve safety. They should then pick specific projects to help them reach those goals, using designs that are proven to improve safety. The public should be able to clearly see and understand what projects were chosen, and assess for themselves the merits of those projects. And finally, agencies that fail to make progress on safety should be held accountable for their performance with real penalties.

If safety is truly the priority, everyone with the money must be held accountable for getting us there. This set of reforms will help us make that happen. Never again should we plow billions into a federal transportation law without ensuring that doing so will produce dramatic improvements on safety.