The majority of federal infrastructure funding is not tied to federal requirements, letting states set their own targets for road safety and improvements.

"The lengths the U.S. Transportation Department can go in shaping how states spend money has emerged as a flash point in the implementation of the [federal] infrastructure package," writes Ian Duncan in The Washington Post.
When the highway administration conducted its most recent performance reviews, covering 2019 and 2020, it often graded states as having made progress even when they performed worse than in previous years. The most recent disclosures show that four states hit all 11 of their targets, yet no state made actual improvements across the board. In reality, 34 states slid backward on at least half of the measures that federal officials track.
"The law does not require that money go to repairing aging or dangerous infrastructure, leaving those spending decisions to state transportation leaders." According to the article, "The federal government has little direct control over what states build, handing over money in the form of huge grants."
While some programs have stricter requirements (for example, "states where cyclists and pedestrians account for more than 15 percent of road deaths will be required to dedicate funding to their safety"), the bulk of federal funding is not attached to specific targets.
While the Federal Highway Administration has defended the system, "The U.S. Transportation Department, however, recently indicated it intends to revisit the approach. A road safety plan that Buttigieg released early this year says the department will consider revising its rules to 'ensure that State safety performance targets demonstrate constant or improved performance for each safety performance measure.'"
FULL STORY: Under federal rules, ‘significant progress’ on infrastructure can mean more road deaths and decrepit bridges

Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.

Canada vs. Kamala: Whose Liberal Housing Platform Comes Out on Top?
As Canada votes for a new Prime Minister, what can America learn from the leading liberal candidate of its neighbor to the north?

The Five Most-Changed American Cities
A ranking of population change, home values, and jobs highlights the nation’s most dynamic and most stagnant regions.

San Diego Adopts First Mobility Master Plan
The plan provides a comprehensive framework for making San Diego’s transportation network more multimodal, accessible, and sustainable.

Housing, Supportive Service Providers Brace for Federal Cuts
Organizations that provide housing assistance are tightening their purse strings and making plans for maintaining operations if federal funding dries up.

Op-Ed: Why an Effective Passenger Rail Network Needs Government Involvement
An outdated rail network that privileges freight won’t be fixed by privatizing Amtrak.
Urban Design for Planners 1: Software Tools
This six-course series explores essential urban design concepts using open source software and equips planners with the tools they need to participate fully in the urban design process.
Planning for Universal Design
Learn the tools for implementing Universal Design in planning regulations.
New York City School Construction Authority
Village of Glen Ellyn
Central Transportation Planning Staff/Boston Region MPO
Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS)
City of Grandview
Harvard GSD Executive Education
Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada
Toledo-Lucas County Plan Commissions